thesis publication in journal

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

The Ultimate Guide to Getting Your Thesis Published in a Journal

7-minute read

• 25th February 2023

Writing your thesis and getting it published are huge accomplishments. However, publishing your thesis in an academic journal is another journey for scholars. Beyond how much hard work, time, and research you invest, having your findings published in a scholarly journal is vital for your reputation as a scholar and also advances research findings within your field.

This guide will walk you through how to make sure your thesis is ready for publication in a journal. We’ll go over how to prepare for pre-publication, how to submit your research, and what to do after acceptance.

Pre-Publication Preparations

Understanding the publishing process.

Ideally, you have already considered what type of publication outlet you want your thesis research to appear in. If not, it’s best to do this so you can tailor your writing and overall presentation to fit that publication outlet’s expectations. When selecting an outlet for your research, consider the following:

●  How well will my research fit the journal?

●  Are the reputation and quality of this journal high?

●  Who is this journal’s readership/audience?

●  How long does it take the journal to respond to a submission?

●  What’s the journal’s rejection rate?

Once you finish writing, revising, editing, and proofreading your work (which can take months or years), expect the publication process to be an additional three months or so.

Revising Your Thesis

Your thesis will need to be thoroughly revised, reworked, reorganized, and edited before a journal will accept it. Journals have specific requirements for all submissions, so read everything on a journal’s submission requirements page before you submit. Make a checklist of all the requirements to be sure you don’t overlook anything. Failing to meet the submission requirements could result in your paper being rejected.

Areas for Improvement

No doubt, the biggest challenge academics face in this journey is reducing the word count of their thesis to meet journal publication requirements. Remember that the average thesis is between 60,000 and 80,000 words, not including footnotes, appendices, and references. On the other hand, the average academic journal article is 4,000 to 7,000 words. Reducing the number of words this much may seem impossible when you are staring at the year or more of research your thesis required, but remember, many have done this before, and many will do it again. You can do it too. Be patient with the process.

Additional areas of improvement include>

·   having to reorganize your thesis to meet the section requirements of the journal you submit to ( abstract, intro , methods, results, and discussion).

·   Possibly changing your reference system to match the journal requirements or reducing the number of references.

·   Reformatting tables and figures.

·   Going through an extensive editing process to make sure everything is in place and ready.

Identifying Potential Publishers

Many options exist for publishing your academic research in a journal. However, along with the many credible and legitimate publishers available online, just as many predatory publishers are out there looking to take advantage of academics. Be sure to always check unfamiliar publishers’ credentials before commencing the process. If in doubt, ask your mentor or peer whether they think the publisher is legitimate, or you can use Think. Check. Submit .

If you need help identifying which journals your research is best suited to, there are many tools to help. Here’s a short list:

○  Elsevier JournalFinder

○  EndNote Matcher

○  Journal/Author Name Estimator (JANE)

○  Publish & Flourish Open Access

·   The topics the journal publishes and whether your research will be a good fit.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

·   The journal’s audience (whom you want to read your research).

·   The types of articles the journal publishes (e.g., reviews, case studies).

·   Your personal requirements (e.g., whether you’re willing to wait a long time to see your research published).

Submitting Your Thesis

Now that you have thoroughly prepared, it’s time to submit your thesis for publication. This can also be a long process, depending on peer review feedback.

Preparing Your Submission

Many publishers require you to write and submit a cover letter along with your research. The cover letter is your sales pitch to the journal’s editor. In the letter, you should not only introduce your work but also emphasize why it’s new, important, and worth the journal’s time to publish. Be sure to check the journal’s website to see whether submission requires you to include specific information in your cover letter, such as a list of reviewers.

Whenever you submit your thesis for publication in a journal article, it should be in its “final form” – that is, completely ready for publication. Do not submit your thesis if it has not been thoroughly edited, formatted, and proofread. Specifically, check that you’ve met all the journal-specific requirements to avoid rejection.

Navigating the Peer Review Process

Once you submit your thesis to the journal, it will undergo the peer review process. This process may vary among journals, but in general, peer reviews all address the same points. Once submitted, your paper will go through the relevant editors and offices at the journal, then one or more scholars will peer-review it. They will submit their reviews to the journal, which will use the information in its final decision (to accept or reject your submission).

While many academics wait for an acceptance letter that says “no revisions necessary,” this verdict does not appear very often. Instead, the publisher will likely give you a list of necessary revisions based on peer review feedback (these revisions could be major, minor, or a combination of the two). The purpose of the feedback is to verify and strengthen your research. When you respond to the feedback, keep these tips in mind:

●  Always be respectful and polite in your responses, even if you disagree.

●  If you do disagree, be prepared to provide supporting evidence.

●  Respond to all the comments, questions, and feedback in a clear and organized manner.

●  Make sure you have sufficient time to make any changes (e.g., whether you will need to conduct additional experiments).

After Publication

Once the journal accepts your article officially, with no further revisions needed, take a moment to enjoy the fruits of your hard work. After all, having your work appear in a distinguished journal is not an easy feat. Once you’ve finished celebrating, it’s time to promote your work. Here’s how you can do that:

●  Connect with other experts online (like their posts, follow them, and comment on their work).

●  Email your academic mentors.

●  Share your article on social media so others in your field may see your work.

●  Add the article to your LinkedIn publications.

●  Respond to any comments with a “Thank you.”

Getting your thesis research published in a journal is a long process that goes from reworking your thesis to promoting your article online. Be sure you take your time in the pre-publication process so you don’t have to make lots of revisions. You can do this by thoroughly revising, editing, formatting, and proofreading your article.

During this process, make sure you and your co-authors (if any) are going over one another’s work and having outsiders read it to make sure no comma is out of place.

What are the benefits of getting your thesis published?

Having your thesis published builds your reputation as a scholar in your field. It also means you are contributing to the body of work in your field by promoting research and communication with other scholars.

How long does it typically take to get a thesis published?

Once you have finished writing, revising, editing, formatting, and proofreading your thesis – processes that can add up to months or years of work – publication can take around three months. The exact length of time will depend on the journal you submit your work to and the peer review feedback timeline.

How can I ensure the quality of my thesis when attempting to get it published?

If you want to make sure your thesis is of the highest quality, consider having professionals proofread it before submission (some journals even require submissions to be professionally proofread). Proofed has helped thousands of researchers proofread their theses. Check out our free trial today.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Adapting a Dissertation or Thesis Into a Journal Article

Dissertations or theses are typically required of graduate students. Undergraduate students completing advanced research projects may also write senior theses or similar types of papers. Once completed, the dissertation or thesis is often submitted (with modifications) as a manuscript for publication in a scholarly journal. Thus, the dissertation or thesis often provides the foundation for a new researcher’s body of published work.

Writers will first want to determine whether the work in their dissertation or thesis merits publication. If it does, we then provide guidance on how to adapt a dissertation or thesis for submission to a journal.

Adapting a dissertation or thesis into a journal article is covered in the seventh edition APA Style Publication Manual in Section 12.1

Deciding to submit a dissertation or thesis for publication

When deciding whether to publish the work in your dissertation or thesis, first consider whether the findings tell a compelling story or answer important questions. Whereas dissertations and theses may present existing knowledge in conjunction with new work, published research should make a novel contribution to the literature. For example, some of your original research questions might be suitable for publication, and others may have been sufficiently addressed in the literature already. Likewise, some of your results may warrant additional experiments or analyses that could help answer the research questions more fully, and you may want to conduct these analyses before seeking publication.

You may also want to consider such factors as whether the current sample size provides sufficient power to adequately inform the analyses and whether additional analyses might clarify ambiguous findings. Consultation with colleagues can help evaluate the potential of the manuscript for publication as well as the selection of an appropriate journal to which to submit it. For information on selecting and prioritizing a journal (and tips for avoiding predatory or deceptive journals), see Sections 12.2 to 12.4 of the Publication Manual .

Adapting a dissertation or thesis for publication

Once a decision is made to convert your dissertation or thesis into a manuscript for submission to a journal, you will want to focus attention on adapting it for publication. By attending to brevity and focus, writing style, relevant literature review and data analyses, and appropriate interpretation of the results or findings, you can enhance the fit of your manuscript for journal publication. Editors and reviewers readily recognize an article that has been hastily converted; careful attention when reformatting the dissertation or thesis is likely to increase the manuscript’s potential for serious consideration and eventual publication.

There are several steps writers seeking to prepare their dissertation or thesis for publication can take beforehand:

• Look at articles in the field and in relevant journals to see what structure and focus are appropriate for their work and how they are formatted.
• Request and consider the input of advisors, colleagues, or other coauthors who contributed to the research on which the dissertation or thesis is based.
• Review an article submitted to a journal alongside their advisor (with permission from the journal editor) or serve as a reviewer for a student competition to gain firsthand insight into how authors are evaluated when undergoing peer review.

The original research reported in a dissertation and thesis can then be reformatted for journal submission following one of two general strategies: the multiple-paper strategy or the conversion strategy.

Multiple-paper strategy

The quickest strategy for converting (or “flipping”) a dissertation or thesis into one or more publishable articles is to use a multiple-paper format when initially writing the dissertation or thesis. This involves structuring the dissertation or thesis used to fulfill the requirements for a degree as a series of shorter papers that are already formatted for journal submission (or close to it). These papers are usually each the length of a journal article, conceptually similar, and come from the same overarching project—but can stand alone as independent research reports. Consult your university’s editorial office to confirm that this is an approved format for your dissertation or thesis and to obtain the specific guidelines.

Conversion strategy

A second strategy is to reformat and convert a dissertation or thesis into a journal article after completing your dissertation or thesis defense to fit the scope and style of a journal article. This often requires adjustments to the following elements:

• Length: Brevity is an important consideration for a manuscript to be considered for journal publication, particularly in the introduction and Discussion sections. Making a dissertation or thesis publication-ready often involves reducing a document of over 100 pages to one third of its original length. Shorten the overall paper by eliminating text within sections and/or eliminating entire sections. If the work examined several research questions, you may consider separating distinct research questions into individual papers; narrow the focus to a specific topic for each paper.
• Abstract: The abstract may need to be condensed to meet the length requirements of the journal. Journal abstract requirements are usually more limited than college or university requirements. For instance, most APA journals limit the abstract length to 250 words.
• Introduction section: One of the major challenges in reformatting a dissertation or thesis is paring down its comprehensive literature review to a more succinct one suitable for the introduction of a journal article. Limit the introductory text to material relating to the immediate context of your research questions and hypotheses. Eliminate extraneous content or sections that do not directly contribute to readers’ knowledge or understanding of the specific research question(s) or topic(s) under investigation. End with a clear description of the questions, aims, or hypotheses that informed your research.
• Method section: Provide enough information to allow readers to understand how the data were collected and evaluated. Refer readers to previous works that informed the current study’s methods or to supplemental materials instead of providing full details of every step taken or the rationale behind them.
• Results section: Be selective in choosing analyses for inclusion in the Results section and report only the most relevant ones. Although an unbiased approach is important to avoid omitting study data, reporting every analysis that may have been run for the dissertation or thesis often is not feasible, appropriate, or useful in the limited space of a journal article. Instead, ensure that the results directly contribute to answering your original research questions or hypotheses and exclude more ancillary analyses (or include them as supplemental materials). Be clear in identifying your primary, secondary, and any exploratory analyses.
• Discussion section: Adjust the discussion according to the analyses and results you report. Check that your interpretation and application of the findings are appropriate and do not extrapolate beyond the data. A strong Discussion section notes area of consensus with and divergence from previous work, taking into account sample size and composition, effect size, limitations of measurement, and other specific considerations of the study.
• References: Include only the most pertinent references (i.e., theoretically important or recent), especially in the introduction and literature review, rather than providing an exhaustive list. Ensure that the works you cite contribute to readers’ knowledge of the specific topic and to understanding and contextualizing your research. Citation of reviews and meta-analyses can guide interested readers to the broader literature while providing an economical way of referencing prior studies.
• Tables and figures: Make sure that tables or figures are essential and do not reproduce content provided in the text.

• Call For Papers 2023
• Online Submission
• Authors GuideLines
• Publication Charge
• Registration
• Certificate Request
• Thesis Publication
• Journal Indexing
• How to publish research paper
• Research Paper Topics
• Editorial Board
• Peer Review & Publication Policy
• Ethics Policy
• Editorial Scope
• 2024- List of Thesis
• Online Thesis Submission
• Thesis Publication Detail
• January 2024 Edition
• February 2024 Edition
• March 2024 Edition
• April 2024 Edition
• May 2024 Edition
• June 2024 Edition
• January 2023 Edition
• February 2023 Edition
• March 2023 Edition
• April 2023 Edition
• May 2023 Edition
• June 2023 Edition
• July 2023 Edition
• August 2023 Edition
• September 2023 Edition
• October 2023 Edition
• November 2023 Edition
• December 2023 Edition
• January 2022 Edition
• February 2022 Edition
• March 2022 Edition
• April 2022 Edition
• May 2022 Edition
• June 2022 Edition
• July 2022 Edition
• August 2022 Edition
• September 2022 Edition
• October 2022 Edition
• November 2022 Edition
• December 2022 Edition
• January 2020 Edition
• February 2020 Edition
• March 2020 Edition
• April 2020 Edition
• May 2020 Edition
• June 2020 Edition
• July 2020 Edition
• August 2020 Edition
• September 2020 Edition
• October 2020 Edition
• November 2020 Edition
• December 2020 Edition
• January 2019 Edition
• February 2019 Edition
• March 2019 Edition
• April 2019 Edition
• May 2019 Edition
• June 2019 Edition
• July 2019 Edition
• August 2019 Edition
• September 2019 Edition
• October 2019 Edition
• November 2019 Edition
• December 2019 Edition
• January 2018 Edition
• February 2018 Edition
• March 2018 Edition
• April 2018 Edition
• May 2018 Edition
• June 2018 Edition
• July 2018 Edition
• August 2018 Edition
• September 2018 Edition
• October 2018 Edition
• November 2018 Edition
• December 2018 Edition
• January 2017 Edition
• February 2017 Edition
• March 2017 Edition
• April 2017 Edition
• May 2017 Edition
• June 2017 Edition
• July 2017 Edition
• August 2017 Edition
• September 2017 Edition
• October 2017 Edition
• November 2017 Edition
• December 2017 Edition
• Archives- All Editions
• Registration Form
• Copyright Transfer
• Scopus Indexing

JOURNAL CALL FOR PAPER

• Call for Paper 2023
• Publication Indexing

AUTHORHS & EDITORS

• Author Guidelines

THESIS PUBLICATION

• Submit Your Thesis
• Published Thesis List
• Thesis Guidelines

CONFERENCE SPONSERSHIP

• Conference Papers
• Sponsorship Guidelines

PUBLICATIONS

• January 2016 Edition
• February 2016 Edition
• March 2016 Edition
• April 2016 Edition
• May 2016 Edition
• June 2016 Edition
• July 2016 Edition
• August 2016 Edition

IJSER Thesis Publication

Thesis publication with ijser – showcase your academic work.

The International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research (IJSER) is a US based Journal dedicated to disseminating scholarly theses to a global academic audience. We provide a platform where Master's and Doctoral research thesis papers can be published and accessed by a global audience of fellow researchers, students, and academics.

Access our current Thesis Publications here .

Global Platform for Thesis Publication

• Embark on the final step of your academic journey with IJSER. Publish your thesis and ensure it is seen and cited by researchers internationally.
• Retain full rights to your academic thesis while allowing IJSER to distribute and showcase your work.

Open Access Thesis Availability

• IJSER's Gold Level open access policy ensures your thesis publication is free to download, increasing its potential impact.
• Your thesis will be optimized for visibility on Google Scholar, making it easy for peers to find and cite your work.

Quality Assurance and Ethical Standards

• Ethical research and submission practices are paramount at IJSER.
• We encourage submissions that are clear, concise, and uphold the highest academic standards.
• For authors where English is a second language, consider professional language editing to ensure your thesis meets publication standards.

Copyright and Support

• Granting IJSER the copyright license to publish your thesis does not relinquish your ownership. We protect your academic rights while ensuring wide dissemination.
• Our editorial team is ready to assist you through the publication process.

Celebrate and Share Your Published Thesis

• Receive your official digitally signed e-certificate from IJSER as a token of your published thesis.
• Your Thesis will be given a permanent dedicated page that highlights your academic profile.

Publish Your Thesis Now!

Begin by completing our Thesis submission form to obtain a unique ID for your work. Our dedicated Editorial Team will review your paper and get back to you within 3 business days.

IJSER: Where Your Thesis Achieves Global Academic Impact. Join the ranks of researchers who have chosen IJSER for their thesis publication, and let your work be recognized on an international scale.

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
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Publishing a Master’s Thesis: A Guide for Novice Authors

Robert g. resta.

1 Swedish Cancer Institute, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA USA

Patricia McCarthy Veach

2 Department of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN USA

Sarah Charles

3 Jefferson Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA USA

Kristen Vogel

4 Center for Medical Genetics, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL USA

Terri Blase

5 Department of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Advocate Christ Medical Center, Oak Lawn, IL USA

Christina G. S. Palmer

6 Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA USA

7 Department of Human Genetics, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA USA

8 UCLA Semel Institute, 760 Westwood Plaza, Room 47-422, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA

Publication of original research, clinical experiences, and critical reviews of literature are vital to the growth of the genetic counseling field, delivery of genetic counseling services, and professional development of genetic counselors. Busy clinical schedules, lack of time and funding, and training that emphasizes clinical skills over research skills may make it difficult for new genetic counselors to turn their thesis projects into publications. This paper summarizes and elaborates upon a presentation aimed at de-mystifying the publishing process given at the 2008 National Society of Genetic Counselors Annual Education Conference. Specific topics include familiarizing prospective authors, particularly genetic counseling students, with the basics of the publication process and related ethical considerations. Former students’ experiences with publishing master’s theses also are described in hopes of encouraging new genetic counselors to submit for publication papers based on their thesis projects.

Introduction

Scholarship is important for growth of a profession and for clinical care. For these reasons, the American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC) endorses scholarly activities through Practice Based Competency IV.5 (American Board of Genetic Counseling 2009 ). Boyer ( 1990 ) describes four types of scholarship (Scholarship of Discovery, Scholarship of Integration, Scholarship of Application, and Scholarship of Teaching), all of which are endorsed by ABGC and required of accredited genetic counseling training programs. The first three types of scholarship, which involve generating new knowledge or applying existing knowledge to an important problem, are the basis of the ABGC’s requirement that students in accredited programs engage in scholarship and complete a scholarly product. The ABGC defines a scholarly product to include: a master’s thesis, an independent research project, a literature review/case report, a formal needs assessment, design and implementation of an innovative patient, professional, or community educational program, and/or preparation of a grant proposal.

The purpose of this article is to encourage students to disseminate their scholarly work (except grant proposals) through a journal publication. This article was developed from an Educational Breakout Session (EBS) at the 2008 National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) Annual Education Conference and draws upon the experiences of a past editor and current assistant editor of the Journal of Genetic Counseling ( JOGC ), a student mentor, and recent genetic counseling graduates who successfully turned their student thesis projects into peer-reviewed publications.

Engaging in scholarship is important for increasing genetic counselors’ self-knowledge, but dissemination of scholarship is essential for the growth of the genetic counseling field. McGaghie and Webster ( 2009 ) identify a wide range of types of scholarly products that promote broad dissemination of information, including peer-reviewed journal articles (e.g., original research, case reports, review articles), book chapters, books or monographs, edited books, essays, editorials, book reviews, letters, conference reports, educational materials, reports of teaching practices, curriculum description, videos, simulations, simulators, and web-based tutorials. As evidence of the importance of disseminating scholarship to the field of genetic counseling, dissemination of scholarly products is actively promoted by the NSGC, the major professional organization for the genetic counseling profession. A prominent example of NSGC’s commitment to dissemination is the JOGC , a professional journal devoted to disseminating peer-reviewed information relevant to the practice of genetic counseling. The success of this journal over nearly two decades is a strong indicator of the value genetic counselors place on publishing journal articles as an essential product of scholarship.

Individuals who have completed a master’s thesis or equivalent should consider publication. This “call to publish” student work is based on evidence that a large proportion of students engage in a scholarly activity with publication potential. A recent survey of 531 genetic counselors suggests that 75% of respondents fulfilled their scholarly activity requirement via a master’s thesis (Clark et al. 2006 ). Among this group, 21% classified their thesis as “hypothesis driven” and 20% classified it as a “descriptive study.” Although the research may be relatively small scale given the time and resource constraints of short training programs (≤2 years), it nonetheless offers a rich and varied source of information about the practice of genetic counseling that could be shared with the broader community through publication. Yet Clark et al. ( 2006 ) found that only 21.6% of respondents who completed a master’s thesis had submitted a manuscript for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. It appears that many students do not submit their research for professional publication, perhaps due to a combination of time constraints, lack of mentoring and support, unfamiliarity with the publication process, lack of professional confidence, and fear of rejection (Clark et al. 2006 ; Cohen et al. 2008 ; Driscoll and Driscoll 2002 ; Keen 2006 ). Because this is one aspect of scholarship that has received limited attention, guidance regarding the details and vicissitudes of the publication process, and acknowledgement that master’s theses can be successfully published, are needed.

Of course, one might question why students should or would publish the results of their graduate work. The answer is complex, without a “one size fits all,” because scholarship can be intrinsically and/or extrinsically motivated. McGaghie and Webster ( 2009 ) describe intrinsic motives as including sharing knowledge, career advancement, status improvement, collegial approval, personal pleasure, and response to challenge; extrinsic motives include academic pressure, commitment to patient care, practice improvement, and promoting the use of new technologies. Although the reasons genetic counselors publish articles have not been empirically evaluated, Clark et al. ( 2006 ) (i) concluded that a substantial number of genetic counselors consider active involvement in research (a form of scholarship and precursor to publication) to be a core role, and (ii) found that respondents endorsed a range of intrinsic and extrinsic motives for their involvement in research. These reasons included interest in the subject, contributing to the field, personal development/satisfaction, diversifying job responsibilities, job requirements, lack of existing research on a particular topic, and career advancement. It is reasonable to infer that these reasons would extend to publication as well.

The work that culminates in a master’s thesis provides the basis for a professional journal article. However, writing a professional journal article differs from writing a master’s thesis. This article, therefore, provides practical ideas and considerations about the process for developing a master’s thesis into a peer-reviewed journal article and describes successful case examples. Research and publication occur in stages and include many important topics. Previous genetic counseling professional development articles have partially or comprehensively addressed the topics of developing and conducting a research project (Beeson 1997 ), writing a manuscript (Bowen 2003 ), and the peer-review process (Weil 2004 ). This paper expands on previous articles by describing the publication process and discussing publication ethics, with emphasis on aspects pertinent to publishing a master’s thesis. It is hoped that this article will encourage genetic counselors to publish their research.

The primary audience for this article is genetic counselors who are conducting a master’s thesis or equivalent or who completed a thesis in the last few years which remains unpublished. The secondary audience is other novice authors and affiliated faculty of genetic counseling training programs. Although the focus of this paper is on journal publications which are subject to a peer-review process (e.g., original research, clinical reports, and reviews), some of the basic information applies to a variety of publishing forms.

The Publication Process

Publish before it perishes.

Like produce and dairy products, data have a limited shelf life. Research results may be rendered marginal by new research, social changes, and shifts in research trends. For example, a study of patient reluctance to undergo genetic testing due to concerns about health insurance discrimination conducted in December 2007 would have been obsolete when the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (Pub.L. 110–233, 122 Stat. 881, enacted May 21, 2008) was enacted 5 months later. Or studies of whether patients think they might undergo testing if a gene for a particular condition were identified become less relevant once the gene is actually mapped and sequenced.

The hardest part about writing is actually writing. Making the time to sit down and compose a report of research findings is a very difficult first step. As noted in the three case examples, this is particularly true for a recent graduate whose time is occupied with searching for a new job, moving to a new city, and learning the details of a new job. However, the longer you wait, the more difficult it becomes, and the greater the risk that your data will grow stale. If you do not write it, the paper will likely not get written. The three case examples identify strong mentorship, ongoing communication with co-authors, constructive criticism, and commitment to publication by every author as key elements for successfully preparing a manuscript. The following sections describe basic processes for preparing a paper. See also Table  1 for helpful references about technical aspects of manuscript preparation.

Table 1

Selected Resources For Manuscript Preparation

Choosing a Journal

Research delivered to an inappropriate audience is ignored. Many journals publish genetic counseling research—as demonstrated by the three case examples—and therefore, choosing the right journal is critical (Thompson 2007 ). The first step is to decide who the audience should be. Is it important to reach genetic counselors? Medical geneticists? Or is the audience outside of the genetic counseling community? Some genetic counseling research is of interest to researchers in patient education, decision-making, or the social sciences. Clinicians such as surgeons, radiology technicians, psychologists, and family practice physicians might benefit from a greater understanding of genetic counseling and how it interfaces with their specialties.

The next step is to decide whether the journal is interested in the type of research conducted. For example, does the journal publish articles mostly on medical and clinical issues? Does it publish qualitative research? A description of the scope, aims, and types of research that are published is located in the “Instructions to Contributors” section on the web page of most journals. A look at the journal’s editorial board might also provide a good idea of a journal’s theoretical approaches, philosophical orientation, and research interests. Another strategy is to contact the journal’s editor or a member of the editorial board prior to submitting a manuscript to discuss the appropriateness of the manuscript for the journal. Many editors welcome such pre-submission contact since it reduces their workload of reading inappropriate manuscripts.

A journal’s “impact factor” may be important to some authors when considering where to publish a manuscript. The impact factor is a—perhaps imperfect—statistical measure of a journal’s importance. The impact factor was developed in the early 1960s by Eugene Garfield and Irving Sher and is technically defined as A/B, where A = the number of times articles published in that journal were cited and B = the number of citable articles published by the journal (letters and editorials are not usually citable articles) (Garfield 1994 ). An impact factor of one indicates that on average, articles published in the journal were cited once by other authors.

A journal’s impact factor can vary greatly from year to year, and its practical utility is widely debated (Andersen et al. 2006 ; Chew et al. 2006 ; Greenwood 2007 ; Ha et al. 2006 ; The PLoS Medicine Editors 2006 ). Genetic counselors often publish small studies and case reports. The journals that might publish such papers usually have impact factors of ten or less. Thus the impact factor may be a less important consideration for many genetic counselors when deciding where to publish.

A publisher’s copyright policy may also influence the choice of where to publish. The majority of publishers own the copyright (United States Copyright Office 2008 ) and authors do not have the right to copy, re-use, or distribute their own publications without buying reprints, which can be a significant source of income for publishers. Some journals, like the Public Library of Science (PLoS), are completely Open Access and make all articles fully available online. Other journals have Delayed Open Access, which makes articles publicly available after a specified period of time, often a year or two. Many journals, such as the JOGC , promote Hybrid Open Access in which authors, for a fee, can make their articles publicly available. Some journals will make select articles publicly available, usually those that attract media attention. For grant-funded research, consider the requirements of the funding source; some granting agencies require that the research results be made publicly available at some point.

Peer Review

Peer review is the process in which two or three experts evaluate a manuscript to determine whether it is worthy of publication. Peer review is the backbone of scholarly publishing; no research manuscript gets published until a team of reviewers and journal editors vets it. Ideally, reviewers are objective, constructively critical, open-minded, fair, and insightful. Some journals blind the reviewer to the author’s identity, in hopes that the authors’ reputations or professional relationships will not influence the review. Some journals will let authors suggest reviewers or request that certain people not review a manuscript. A journal’s peer review policies may be another important consideration in choosing where to submit a manuscript.

In practice, peer review is not always ideal (Benose et al. 2007 ; Curfman et al. 2008 ; Hames 2007 ; Wager et al. 2006 ). Nonetheless, no better or viable alternative has been proposed. Reviews may sometimes appear to be arbitrary, unfair, and poorly performed. Reading such reviews can be very difficult and frustrating, even for experienced authors. However, it is a reviewer’s job to be critical, and there may be elements of truth in even the most negative reviews. Some editors may be willing to send a manuscript to another reviewer if an original reviewer produces a harshly critical or poorly thought out critique. Some journals have a formal appeals process if a manuscript is rejected or an author feels a review is inaccurate, inappropriate, or biased. However, sometimes it is simply easier to submit the manuscript to a different journal. Case # 2 describes a successful example where submitting a manuscript to a different journal led to publication.

The manuscript rejection rate varies widely across journals, but about half of all manuscripts are rejected or require significant revisions (Armstrong et al. 2008 ; Hall and Wilcox 2007 ; Liesegang et al. 2007 ). About half of rejected manuscripts are published in other journals (Armstrong et al. 2008 ; Hall and Wilcox 2007 ; Liesegang et al. 2007 ). Even among articles that are accepted for publication, the vast majority will require significant revisions. All three case examples describe manuscripts that underwent significant revision. Thus, prospective authors should not be disheartened if a manuscript is rejected or needs extensive re-writing; this is the rule rather than the exception . Many editors are willing to work with authors who have questions about specific comments or how best to incorporate the reviewers’ suggestions. Busy journal editors would rather answer questions up front than have to laboriously edit a revised manuscript and send it back for further revisions.

Peer review, and the subsequent manuscript revisions, along with the number of manuscripts submitted to the journal, are probably the most critical bottlenecks in determining how long it takes before a manuscript appears in print. Typically, a year or more may pass from the time of submission to the publication date. The three case examples include their timeframes to highlight the need for perseverance and patience with the publication process.

The clearest way for authors to respond to editors’ and reviewers’ comments is to prepare a table that lists each comment and how the authors addressed them, item by item. Some reviewers’ comments may be inaccurate or simply unrealistic (e.g. “The authors should re-do the entire research study...”); these can be discussed in the table or in the cover letter that accompanies the table. Additional information about the peer-review process can be found in Weil ( 2004 ).

Acceptance!

Once a manuscript is accepted for publication, the publisher or the journal editor will send a copyright transfer statement that spells out ownership of the article. This statement must be signed and returned in short order before the manuscript will be published. The corresponding author will receive page proofs, usually electronically, which must be read by the author for accuracy and returned fairly quickly (usually 2–3 days). Many publishers are reluctant to make significant changes in the page proofs, and they may charge for substantial revisions. Thus, the version of the manuscript that is submitted to the journal before the page proofs are generated should be very close to what the author wishes to see in print. Usually at this time publishers will offer the author the option to purchase reprints to allow the author to share the publication with other researchers, co-authors, and colleagues. Some journals will provide a limited number of free reprints or a complimentary copy of the issue of the journal in which the paper appears. The steps in the publication process are summarized in Table  2 .

Table 2

Steps in the Publication Process

a ∼50% of manuscripts are rejected or require significant revision before being accepted for publication

Ethics of Publishing

“Scholarship (like life) is not always fair or precise.” (Thompson 1994 )

Manuscript preparation and submission for publication can be complicated by ethical issues. Many authors may not be aware of these ethical conundrums, let alone have a plan for addressing them. Ethics is not a stagnant concept. As research methodologies and research questions evolve, new ethical issues in publishing arise. This section contains a description of several issues broadly relevant to the publishing practice of genetic counselors, particularly as students or recent graduates. However, it is important for genetic counselors-as-authors to keep abreast of ethical issues relevant to their own work.

“Ethics” are principles that govern the behavior of individuals or groups (Merriam-Webster 1974 ). Ethical codes of conduct exist in order to preserve the integrity of a profession, ensure the public’s welfare, and protect scholars. Ethical issues particularly relevant to writing for publication, include: (1) authorship determination, (2) disclosure and conflicts of interest, (3) plagiarism, (4) subject confidentiality, (5) accuracy of information, and (6) publishing in multiple sources.

Authorship Determination

Consider the following situation: A student conducted an excellent study for her master’s thesis project. At the beginning of the project, her supervisor promised her that she would have first authorship on any manuscripts based on the project. However, when the time came to write the paper, the student procrastinated. Finally, after the supervisor repeatedly “nagged” her, she submitted a draft to her, but it was very poorly written. The supervisor decided the only way to salvage the paper was to totally rewrite it herself. Now the supervisor thinks that she deserves to be the first author. Is this ethical? Does it matter if the project was the student’s master’s thesis rather than a project in which she was voluntarily involved? Are there guidelines that might be implemented in advance to handle this kind of situation?

This complex situation may be all too familiar for many supervisors and students. It raises issues about valuing contributions to the publication process, the power differential between supervisors and students, determining when renegotiation of authorship is warranted, and setting expectations and priorities up front. Whenever manuscripts are authored by more than one individual, order of authorship should be negotiated as early in the process as possible. Only individuals who have actually contributed to the work should be listed as authors. Their order should indicate “...the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status” (Shadish 1994 ) (p. 1096). In the sciences, the first and last authors typically are the individuals that made the greatest contributions to the project (Laflin et al. 2005 ). Many journals require a listing of each author’s contribution to the manuscript in order to make sure each person meets the journal’s requirements to be listed as an author.

Student authors pose a special situation. Doctoral students usually are the first authors of papers based on their dissertation research (Nguyen and Nguyen 2006 ). Authorship order is less clear for masters’ projects because masters’ students may lack sufficient knowledge and skills to conduct a project and prepare a manuscript of publishable quality without considerable input from their supervisor (Shadish 1994 ). Thompson ( 1994 ) recommends that when there is any question as to who made the primary contribution, the student should receive higher authorship. His recommendation helps to protect the person who has less power in the situation. Often students are involved in studies that are not based on their own master’s or doctoral research, but rather are connected to an existing research program, such as case examples 1 and 2. In those situations, some authors contend that their involvement should be creative and intellectual in order to warrant authorship; otherwise, student input can be credited in an acknowledgement section (Fine and Kurdek 1993 ; Holaday and Yost 1995 ; Thompson 1994 ).

Negotiating authorship is an important step that should begin in the initial stages of a project. This step usually involves assessing and agreeing upon each person’s tasks, contributions, and efforts. The amount of supervision required for an individual’s contributions is usually considered as well (Fine and Kurdek 1993 ). Sometimes renegotiation of authorship order is necessary due to unexpected changes and/or substantial revision of the manuscript. The key is to remember that authorship is negotiated. Questions to consider throughout this negotiation process include: Who had the original idea for the basis of the publication? Who designed and conducted the study that generated the data? Who will write most of the first draft of the paper? Is the study part of someone’s research lab? Students should maintain early and on-going communication with their co-authors about their investment of time and efforts and the outcomes of those efforts (Sandler and Russell 2005 ). However, scholarly contribution is more important than actual time and effort expended when determining authorship. For more information regarding authorship determination, it may be useful to review guidelines for discussing and clarifying authorship order (Gibelman and Gelman 1999 ) or developing individualized contracts for research collaboration (Stith et al. 1992 ). These guidelines also may be useful for initiating discussion of authorship as part of the curriculum in genetic counseling training programs.

Take another look at the authorship scenario. At the time of the original negotiation of authorship, it is likely that the supervisor (and other parties) believed the student warranted first authorship due to her creative contributions and time allotted to the study. In most authors’ minds, first authorship is equated with substantial contribution to writing the manuscript, usually the first draft, so it is important the student understand this is part of the responsibilities of being first author. Typically students have no experience writing a journal article, and so some procrastination is likely. In this scenario, the authorship dilemma may have been averted by having in place a plan to mentor the student, providing support, and delineating a specific process for writing the first draft of the manuscript.

Manuscripts invariably undergo substantial revision as co-authors and reviewers weigh in, so it is not unusual that the supervisor would revise the student’s first draft. This activity does not prima facie warrant a change in authorship order. However, by developing a specific plan to support the student’s writing, it may minimize the extent of the supervisor’s revisions. It is possible, though, that the student’s procrastination and poor writing should initiate a renegotiation of authorship order because the level and nature of her contributions to the work may be changing. The supervisor and student should discuss the reasons for changing authorship order; the supervisor should not unilaterally make this change without discussion. Keep in mind that the bar for changing authorship should be much higher if the paper is based on the student’s master’s thesis than if it is based on a project in which she was voluntarily involved. It is also important to inform students early in the process that most research is a collaborative effort, requiring time, energy, and sometimes funding, and therefore their collaborators have expectations that their contributions will be rewarded through publication. Developing an a priori policy for renegotiation may often reduce misunderstandings and minimize conflict.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Consider the following situation: A student conducted a study to evaluate a new program that her clinic is offering to its patients. She interviewed ten patients who participated in the program about their experience. Nine of these patients were in general agreement about the value of the program, while the 10th patient was quite negative about her experience. The student’s impression of this patient is that she is a generally negative person. The student believes that the patient came into the program expecting not to like it. Furthermore, the student is concerned her clinic will lose funding for this program if she reports this patient’s responses. The student decides to exclude her data from the paper. Is this decision ethical? Why or why not?

One ethical issue raised in this scenario involves determining when it is appropriate to exclude data points. Data collected from research can be messy, and it is not unusual for some data points to be excluded from analyses. However, there must be an explicit methodology for excluding data points or subjects, and this information usually is reported in the manuscript. Examples for exclusions include: missing data (e.g., a participant did not complete a majority of the items on a questionnaire); measurement error (e.g., the recorded measurement of a biological process or part of the anatomy is simply impossible); small sample sizes (e.g., an insufficient number of individuals from a minority group participated in the research resulting in numbers too small for meaningful analysis). In the scenario described above, the rationale provided for excluding the 10th patient’s experience is not sufficient to warrant exclusion. Instead, it appears that exclusion of this individual is based on a desire to promote the new program in the student’s clinic. In order to eliminate this form of conflict of interest, one could consider involving a clinic outsider in the analysis and interpretation of the data. By including a clinic outsider in the project, editor and reviewer concerns about the integrity of the data, analyses, and conclusions will be allayed.

Most journals provide another “safeguard,” by requiring a statement about possible conflicts of interest. A conflict of interest statement requires the author to acknowledge in writing the nature of any circumstances that might bias the process and/or outcome of their work. For example, any project and published report that might result in direct financial gains for an author(s) should be disclosed to a journal’s editor and to the readership. Examples of possible conflicts of interest include conducting a study of the effectiveness of a genetic test funded by the company that developed and is marketing the test, or a program evaluation study whose outcome would determine the continuation of the investigators/authors’ jobs.

Plagiarism is a familiar concept to most people. Everyone generally understands the importance of “giving credit where credit is due.” Yet, the National Science Foundation estimates that the prevalence of plagiarism may be as high as 50% (Roig 2001 ). Probably many of these incidents are unintentional and/or occur because the authors were unaware of some of the nuances regarding plagiarism. Although there is some variability within and across disciplines about the specific behaviors that constitute plagiarism, there is general agreement about two broad types (Roig 2001 ): cryptamnesia -an individual thinks their idea is original when it actually was presented by someone else previously; and inappropriate paraphrasing —an individual uses another person’s published text without properly citing that use, and/or using their statements with little or no modification. Specific examples of inappropriate paraphrasing include: (1) publishing another person’s work as one’s own; (2) copying part of another author’s paper and claiming it as one’s own; (3) copying text from another source without using quotations marks and without citing that source in the text; (4) paraphrasing text from another source without providing an in-text citation; (5) summarizing material from another source without clearly connecting the summary to that source; and (6) using copyrighted materials without author/publisher permission (East 2006 ; Lester and Lester Jr. 1992 ).

Additional types of plagiarism include ambiguous use of citations. For instance, an individual includes a citation in a paragraph but does not clearly indicate which content in the paragraph is from the cited work. Another type of plagiarism is self-plagiarism . Self-plagiarism occurs when an individual includes published work of their own for which they do not own the copyright (e.g., reprinting a table from one of their previously published papers); repeating verbatim text from a previously published article. Permission to reprint material from the publisher must be obtained.

Plagiarism is a serious ethical breach which can result in a legal penalty. Strategies for avoiding plagiarism include limiting the use of direct quotes; avoiding the use of secondary sources—it is always better to read and cite an original source when available; and restating ideas in one’s own words while providing in-text citation of the work that contains the original ideas (East 2006 ; Lambie et al. 2008 ; Lester and Lester Jr. 1992 ). When in doubt regarding the originality of one’s words, it is best to cite the source(s) on which they are based. In this regard, it may help to bear in mind that readers will assume all words in the paper are the author’s unless the source(s) are cited.

Subject Confidentiality

Published papers must be written in a way that no subjects can be recognized by others without their written consent (Gavey and Braun 1997 ). Given the unique nature of genetics, family members may also need to provide written consent (McCarthy Veach et al. 2001 ). When possible, identifying information should be removed or disguised (e.g., use of pseudonyms) and data based on multiple subjects should be reported in aggregate (group) form. Institutional review boards (IRBs) play a critical role in assuring protection of subject confidentiality. Many journals require authors to indicate either in the paper or a cover letter that they have obtained institutional review board approval to conduct their animal or human subjects study. In some cases, an ethics board may have been consulted regarding ethical dilemmas reported in a clinical paper and this should be acknowledged in the paper.

Accuracy of Information

Authors are responsible for rigorously checking the accuracy of their facts, data, and conclusions. However, despite one’s best efforts, substantial errors sometimes are not discovered until after a paper is published. In that case, the corresponding author should contact the journal immediately and ask that an erratum be published. On a related note, authors have a professional responsibility to make data sets reported in published papers available to other professionals. This practice allows for verification of the findings and conclusions, and it also makes possible research replications and extensions of the original study. The length of time for retaining research records depends on institutional policy and sponsor policy, so it is important to be aware of how these policies apply to the research generated by a master’s thesis. Often institutional review boards require researchers to state how long they will maintain a data set, and the researchers must adhere to that time frame.

Another accuracy issue concerns modifying and reporting the use of published material (e.g., an interview protocol, psychological instrument, curriculum) without clearly describing the precise nature of the modifications. Interpretation of findings and their comparison to other studies using the “same” instrumentation may be severely compromised when an author fails to report modifications. Further, professional courtesy suggests that permission be sought from the author before changing her or his material. Also, use of published material requires crediting the author(s) of that material by including relevant citations.

Publishing in Multiple Sources

In the sciences, a manuscript should not be under review by more than one journal at a time. It is, however, acceptable to submit material for presentation at a conference prior to its actual publication in a journal, as the authors in case examples 1 and 3 did. Some conferences publish proceedings , and some journals will not publish work that is already published in a Proceedings unless the two papers differ substantially. When in doubt, it is good practice to contact a journal’s editor to determine the journal’s policy. Journals typically only publish original work, but on occasion there may be interest in reprinting an article. Reprinting a previously published paper requires written permission from the owner of the publication copyright. As a matter of courtesy, one should also seek the corresponding author’s permission, even if the author does not own the copyright.

Examples of Success

The benefits of sharing knowledge within the medical community and with the public via publication have been delineated. The publication of original work contributes to the advancement of the genetic counseling field overall, and at the individual level, authorship establishes a level of professional credibility, enhancing opportunities for future employability, funding and job satisfaction. The opportunity to develop a genetic counseling master’s thesis into a manuscript should therefore not be overlooked. Below are the personal accounts of three recent graduates who successfully transformed their individual master’s theses into published manuscripts. These examples were not systematically ascertained, and as such, do not necessarily represent all experiences with trying to publish a master’s thesis. These stories provide “first-hand accounts” of the authors’ experiences and, while acknowledging the challenges, demonstrate commitment to publishing their own projects throughout their careers. Table  3 contains a list of helpful hints gleaned from these cases.

Table 3

Helpful Hints for First Time Authors

Case 1: Consider Writing Your Thesis and Journal Article Concurrently

As a result of personal determination, and above all, strong mentorship, I was able to turn my master’s thesis work into a manuscript published in Patient Education and Counseling , titled “Satisfaction with genetic counseling for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among African American women” (Charles et al. 2006 ). My work was a small component of an existing research project being conducted within a university academically affiliated with my genetic counseling training program. The project was an evaluation of the overall effects of “Culturally Tailored vs. Standard Genetic Counseling Protocol” among African American women.

I started by reviewing previous publications this group of researchers had produced and using these as a guide for my first draft, followed by multiple revisions. Approximately 17 months elapsed between first submission and publication. We submitted the manuscript in its original form in May 2005. We received the reviewers’ comments later that summer, and submitted revisions five months later. The article was accepted in that same month, published online five months later and in print seven months after the online version appeared. Shortly after graduating from my program I submitted an abstract of the work to NSGC for presentation at the 2005 Annual Education Conference, and subsequently learned that it was selected for the NSGC Beth Fine Student Abstract award.

My experience may be unusual because I worked on the manuscript and thesis project concurrently. Composing separate but related documents while still juggling second year genetic counseling student responsibilities was certainly a challenge. Preparing a comprehensive thesis project is a very different task than manuscript composition, the latter of which is more focused and narrow in scope. Challenges posed by this concurrent approach included ensuring that text requirements and deadlines specific to each document were met, as well as incorporating and addressing the reviews of both the training program and peer-reviewers. The main benefits of this approach were that I was still in school and therefore geographically close to my mentors, which facilitated ongoing communication throughout the process, and that the manuscript was under review by a journal before I started my new job.

Factors contributing to the successful publication of this project include mentorship, accountability, and commitment to publication by every author. Supportive, constructively critical, and well published, my mentors had high standards and knew the process. Frankly, I did not want to disappoint them. I found setting deadlines and meeting them, along with the accountability of in-person meetings (as opposed to email), to be effective approaches. Finally, publishing the project was a stated goal of the authors at the initiation of the project. I will not claim that the process was easy, but the goal is certainly attainable and worthwhile.

Case 2: You Need Not Publish Every Thesis Finding—Pick The Most Interesting and Relevant

As is the case for many graduate students, the first time I attempted to publish was after I completed my thesis. My thesis concerned the development of a minority research recruitment database and was the result of my graduate research on underserved populations.

Following graduation, I started my first job as a genetic counselor in a new city. During the overwhelming process of adjusting to “my new life,” my thesis advisor asked me to submit a manuscript to the American Journal of Public Health in response to a call for abstracts on genetics topics. Unfortunately, the deadline was only one week away. I scrambled to cut down my lengthy thesis to a reasonable length and submitted it, knowing that it was not my best work given the time constraint. Needless to say, it was rejected.

I decided that before resubmitting the manuscript to a different journal, I would need to take a different approach to the paper, more or less starting over. While my research results were interesting, they were limited in their application. I decided to publish instead on the success of our research initiative, as other researchers could learn from our process. Since I was changing the focus of the manuscript, I had to do an additional literature search and produce much of the writing from scratch. Most of this work had to be completed in my free time. While it was difficult to stay motivated, working on my manuscript when first starting a job was manageable as my caseload was lightest in the beginning. After several weeks of hard work, I submitted the manuscript to Health Promotion Practice .

About one month later, the editor contacted me and asked me to resubmit my manuscript with revisions. Three different reviewers provided feedback. Initially, it was overwhelming to read through their comments and frustrating, particularly when the reviewers contradicted each other. Despite my frustration, with my co-authors’ guidance I forged ahead and resubmitted, only to have the editor and reviewers ask for additional revisions. There were comments from the same three reviewers, however, far fewer in number. Still, I was beginning to think they would never accept the manuscript. I once again called upon my co-authors for guidance and was able to address the reviewers’ comments and resubmit the manuscript once again.

This time when I heard from the editor, the manuscript was finally accepted. What started out as a 120 page thesis ended up being published as an eight page paper (Vogel et al. 2007 ). It took approximately 8 months of writing and revising before the manuscript was finally accepted and an additional year before it came out in print. While the entire process was a true test of patience and determination, it was ultimately worth it. The experience gave me the foundation to carry on my research career and continue to publish successfully.

Case 3: Expectations and Mentorship are Crucial

I defended my thesis, received my Master’s degree, and was about to move back to the Midwest to start my new job as a genetic counselor, but my long “To-Do” list had one remaining item: Publish master’s thesis. I started the initial master’s thesis process with the expectation from one of my thesis advisors, and now a co-author, that research is not “put down and set aside” until published. I never questioned the process; if I was going to work with this advisor, I would be publishing. I was excited to undertake this challenge and impressed by my thesis advisor’s dedication, mentorship, and desire to see our hard work recognized. Nearly two years later, I could proudly say that this expectation, held by all of my thesis advisors and me, was accomplished. The manuscript, published in the JOGC , describes qualitative research regarding communication of genetic test results within a family (Blase et al. 2007 ).

In the beginning, I was unfamiliar with the publication process, but because of the support and guidance of my advisors, I began to learn the process, and so the frustrations and uncertainties were minimal. I also had a great working relationship with my co-authors that included communicating regularly and setting and meeting deadlines. After deciding the JOGC was the most appropriate venue for my research, I spent a good deal of time reducing and reformatting the 80 page thesis to a 20–25 page manuscript to meet the journal’s guidelines. Given the page constraints, this process necessitated determining which data to focus on and re-framing some information to appropriately fit the readers of my selected journal. Conversations with my advisors were instrumental in this phase.

There was nothing quick about publishing my master’s thesis. I graduated in June 2005, received an email shortly thereafter from one of my advisors about how to begin constructing a first draft of a manuscript, and began working on the manuscript in July 2005. I submitted the manuscript to JOGC in May 2006 and subsequently was informed by the editor that based on the reviews, revisions were required before the manuscript could be considered for publication. In September 2006, after two rounds of revisions, my manuscript was accepted, and by June 2007 it was published in the journal.

Although ultimately I was successful in publishing my master’s thesis, the process had its moments of frustration. I remember getting my first round of comments from the reviewers; I thought I was never going to get to the point of publication. My co-authors supported and encouraged me by explaining that revisions are truly part of the process. I was overwhelmed by the reviewers’ list of questions and changes after my initial submission, followed by additional reviews and revisions. Not only did I have to figure out how to keep the manuscript a priority in light of my new job, but I had to weed through and address the reviewers’ comments, and the suggestions of each co-author. The guidance of my thesis advisors, now co-authors, helped me navigate this process.

I have gained much through this experience. The process has opened doors for me including opportunities to work with other professionals with impressive publishing experiences, as well as speaking and poster presentation opportunities at national conferences. I also have greater confidence about the publishing process. What seemed like such a daunting and impossible task is now an attainable outcome. Although my master’s thesis was my most recent publication, the thought of taking on the publication process again is not nearly as intimidating as I once thought.

Publication of original research, clinical experience, and literature reviews are vital to the growth of the genetic counseling field and to the delivery of genetic counseling services. Publishing also promotes personal growth by counting toward maintenance of ABGC-certification as well as establishing the author as a credible and respected authority both within and outside the genetic counseling field. This professional recognition in turn can lead to employment opportunities, speaking engagements, research funding, and career advancement.

Submitting a manuscript for publication also can be an intellectually challenging, emotionally trying, and time-consuming task. But similar to life’s other difficult tasks, the rewards and satisfaction are commensurately great—to see your name in print, have your work cited by other authors, and know that you have contributed in a meaningful way to the practice and understanding of genetic counseling. Transforming a master’s thesis into a journal article is an obvious first step in developing and sustaining a commitment to publishing for our genetic counseling profession. Common themes in the three success experiences include the importance of mentorship and clear expectations for publishing, recognition of the length of the process and concomitant need for perseverance in the face of revisions, awareness of personal and professional benefits in terms of presentations at national meetings, awards, and motivation to continue publishing. Hopefully the information provided in this article will help to de-mystify the publishing process, promote consideration of ethical issues in publishing, and stimulate genetic counseling students and new graduates to embrace a “Publish for Success” philosophy.

Acknowledgments

This paper was developed from an Educational Breakout Session (EBS) sponsored by the Jane Engelberg Memorial Fellowship Advisory Group at the 2008 NSGC Annual Education Conference.

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

• American Board of Genetic Counseling. 2009. Competencies . https://doi.org/www.abgc.net/english/view.asp?x=1529&all=true . Accessed October 26, 2009.
• Andersen J, Belmont J, Cho CT. Journal impact factor in the era of expanding literature. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection. 2006; 39 :436–443. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Armstrong AW, Idriss SZ, Kimball AB, Bernhard JD. Fate of manuscripts declined by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology . Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2008; 58 :632–635. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2007.12.025. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beeson D. Nuance, complexity, and context: qualitative methods in genetic counseling research. Journal of Genetic Counseling. 1997; 6 :21–43. doi: 10.1023/A:1025659701805. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Benose DJ, Bashari E, Chaves JM, Gaggar A, Kapoor N, LaFrance M, et al. The ups and downs of peer review. Advances in Physiology Education. 2007; 31 :145–152. doi: 10.1152/advan.00104.2006. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blase T, Martinez A, Grody WW, Schimmenti L, Palmer CGS. Sharing GJB2/GJB6 genetic test information with family members. Journal of Genetic Counseling. 2007; 16 :313–324. doi: 10.1007/s10897-006-9066-z. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bowen NK. How to write a research article for the Journal of Genetic Counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling. 2003; 12 :5–21. doi: 10.1023/A:1021491016830. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boyer EL. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
• Charles S, Kessler L, Stopfer JE, Domchek S, Halbert CH. Satisfaction with genetic counseling for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among African American women. Patient Education and Counseling. 2006; 63 :196–204. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.10.007. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chew M, Villanueva EV, Van Der Weyden MB. Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994–2005) and their editors’ views. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 2006; 100 :142–150. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark HM, Gamm J, Huether CA, Buncher CR, Blough Pfau RI, Steinberg Warren N. Genetic counselors and research: current practices and future directions. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C (Seminars in Medical Genetics) 2006; 142C :276–283. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.30106. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen BL, Friedman E, Zier K. Publications by students doing a year of full-time research: what are realistic expectations? The American Journal of Medicine. 2008; 121 :545–548. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.03.006. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Curfman GD, Morrissey S, Annas GJ, Drazen JM. Peer review in the balance. New England Journal of Medicine. 2008; 358 :2276–2277. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe0803516. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Driscoll J, Driscoll A. Writing an article for publication: an open invitation. Journal of Orthopaedic Nursing. 2002; 6 :144–152. doi: 10.1016/S1361-3111(02)00053-5. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• East J. The problem of plagiarism in academic culture. International Journal for Educational Integrity. 2006; 2 :16–28. doi: 10.21913/IJEI.v2i2.88. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fine MA, Kurdek LA. Reflections on determining authorship credit and authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American Psychologist. 1993; 48 :1141–1147. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.48.11.1141. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garfield, E. (1994). The Thomson Scientific Impact Factor Thomson Reuters (formerly the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)) . https://doi.org/www.thomsonreuters.com/business_units/scientific/free/essays/impactfactor/ . Accessed 1/24/2009.
• Gavey N, Braun V. Ethics and the publication of clinical case material. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 1997; 28 :399–404. doi: 10.1037/0735-7028.28.4.399. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gibelman M, Gelman SR. Who’s the author? Ethical issues in publishing. Journal of Social Work Education. 1999; 35 :203–213. doi: 10.1080/10437797.1999.10778960. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greenwood DC. Reliability of journal impact factor rankings. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2007; 7 :48–53. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-48. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ha TC, Tan SB, Soo KC. The journal impact factor: too much of an impact? Annals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore. 2006; 35 :911–916. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hall SA, Wilcox AJ. The fate of epidemiologic manuscripts: a study of papers submitted to Epidemiology . Epidemiology. 2007; 18 :262–265. doi: 10.1097/01.ede.0000254668.63378.32. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hames I. Peer review and manuscript management in scientific journals—Guidelines for good practice. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Holaday M, Yost TE. Authorship credit and ethical guidelines. Counseling and Values. 1995; 40 :24–31. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-007X.1995.tb00384.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Keen A. Writing for publication: pressures, barriers, and support strategies. Nurse Education Today. 2006; 27 :382–388. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.05.019. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Laflin MT, Glover ED, McDermott RJ. Publication ethics: an examination of authorship practices. American Journal of Health Behavior. 2005; 29 :579–587. doi: 10.5993/AJHB.29.6.12. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lambie GW, Sias SM, Davis KM, Lawson G, Akos P. A scholarly writing resource for counselor educators and their students. Journal of Counseling & Development. 2008; 86 :18–25. doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6678.2008.tb00621.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lester JD, Lester JD., Jr . The research paper handbook. Glenview: Goodyear Books; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liesegang TJ, Shaikh M, Crook JE. The outcome of manuscripts submitted to the American Journal of Ophthalmology between 2002 and 2003. American Journal of Ophthalmology. 2007; 143 :551–560. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2006.12.004. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McCarthy Veach P, Bartels DM, LeRoy BS. Ethical and professional challenges posed by patients with genetic concerns: A report of focus group discussions with genetic counselors, physicians, and nurses. Journal of Genetic Counseling. 2001; 10 :97–120. doi: 10.1023/A:1009487513618. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McGaghie WC, Webster A. Scholarship, publication, and career advancement in health professions education: AMEE Guide No. 43. Medical Teacher. 2009; 31 :574–590. doi: 10.1080/01421590903050366. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merriam-Webster . The Merriam-Webster dictionary. New York: Pocket Books; 1974. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nguyen T, Nguyen TD. Authorship ethics: issues and suggested guidelines for the helping professions. Counseling and Values. 2006; 50 :208–216. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-007X.2006.tb00057.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roig M. Plagiarism and paraphrasing criteria of college and university professors. Ethics & Behavior. 2001; 11 :307–323. doi: 10.1207/S15327019EB1103_8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sandler JC, Russell BL. Faculty-student collaborations: ethics and satisfaction with authorship credit. Ethics & Behavior. 2005; 15 :65–80. doi: 10.1207/s15327019eb1501_5. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shadish W. APA ethics and student authorship on master’s theses. American Psychologist. 1994; 49 :1096. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.49.12.1096. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stith SM, Barasch Jester S, Linn JL. Student-faculty collaborative research. Family Relations. 1992; 41 :470–474. doi: 10.2307/585594. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• The PLoS Medicine Editors. (2006). The impact factor game. PLoS Medicine , 3, e291 doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030291. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Thompson B. The big picture(s) in deciding authorship order. American Psychologist. 1994; 49 :1095–1096. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.49.12.1095. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson PJ. How to choose the right journal for your manuscript. Chest. 2007; 132 :1073–1076. doi: 10.1378/chest.07-1340. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• United States Copyright Office. (2008). Copyright basics . https://doi.org/www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.pdf . Accessed 1/14/2009.
• Vogel K, Murthy VS, Dudley B, Grubs RE, Gettig E, Ford A, et al. The use of family health histories to address health disparities in an African-American community. Health Promotion Practice. 2007; 8 :350–357. doi: 10.1177/1524839906293395. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wager E, Parkin EC, Tamber PS. Are reviewers suggested by authors as good as those chosen by editors? Results of a rater-blinded, retrospective study. BMC Medicine. 2006; 30 :13. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-4-13. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weil J. Peer review: an essential step in the publishing process. Journal of Genetic Counseling. 2004; 13 :183–187. doi: 10.1023/B:JOGC.0000028252.93942.40. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Research Guides

Submit and publish your thesis.

• The Graduate Thesis: What is it?
• Thesis Defences
• Deadlines and Fees
• Formatting in MS Word
• Formatting in LaTeX
• Making Thesis Accessible
• Thesis Embargo
• Review and Release
• Your Rights as an Author
• Re-using Third Party Materials
• Creative Commons Licenses for Theses
• Turning Thesis into an Article
• Turning Thesis into a Book
• Other Venues of Publication

Publishing from your thesis before or after graduation

"Will repository submission affect my publishing plans?"

... this is a common question for someone looking to publish from their thesis before or after graduation.

Most journals welcome submissions based on a thesis or dissertation. Some may have additional requirements, such as to:

• Let them know about the university’s requirement to make your thesis publicly available
• Submit a manuscript that is substantially different than the thesis content
• Embargo the thesis until after publication, etc.

Your steps will depend on the following scenarios:

Scenario 1 - you ARE NOT planning on publishing your thesis before or after graduation

In this case:

• You can submit your thesis without an embargo
• Your thesis will become publicly available in TSpace  and Library and Archives Canada after your convocation and will be widely indexed via search engines and indexes
• Use the TSpace-generated permanent URL to share and cite your thesis - see example of such citation below

Tajdaran, K. (2015). Enhancement of Peripheral Nerve Regeneration with Controlled Release of Glial Cell Line-derived Neurotrophic Factor (GDNF) (Master’s Thesis, University of Toronto). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1807/74747

Scenario 2 - You ARE planning on publishing your thesis AFTER graduation

Most journals are interested in “original, previously unpublished” research. Some journals consider theses as a form of “prior publications”, others do not, and the majority does not have a clear definition. It will be best to check journal policy before you submit your thesis.

Nature Research will consider submissions containing material that has previously formed part of a PhD or other academic thesis which has been published according to the requirements of the institution awarding the qualification.

►►►How to check journal policies:

• MIT Libraries' list of policy excerpts from major publishers
• Journal’s website - usually under Information for Authors or Copyright / Permissions or Editorial Policy; or in the publication agreement if available online
• If such information cannot be located online, contact the editors directly
• If the journal requires that you place an embargo on your thesis until after publication, see the SGS instructions on how to request an embargo on your thesis .

Scenario 3 - You ARE planning on publishing (or have already published) from your thesis BEFORE graduation

You may want or be expected to publish parts of your thesis before your thesis is submitted, such as with an integrated/publication-based/sandwich thesis. The most important thing to keep in mind here is copyright. You own copyright of your written materials, and a publisher may require copyright transfer of your manuscript.

You need to ensure you retain certain rights or obtain permission in order to satisfy the university’s requirement of making your thesis openly accessible via TSpace, ProQuest and Library and Archives Canada (LAC). For more details on these repositories, see the  Review and Release  section of this guide.

Check whether the journal requires prior notification about U of T’s open access requirement for theses. Some journals want to be notified of this mandate whether or not they restrict the re-use of articles in theses.

Check whether the publisher requires copyright transfer . This should be stated on their website, in the publication agreement, or you can inquire directly with the journal.

If the publisher does not require copyright transfer , i.e. author retains copyright, then you can reuse your article/chapter in your thesis; no permission needed.

If the publisher requires copyright transfer , follow these steps:

Check if the publisher has special provisions for reusing your published work in your thesis. They may permit the inclusion of a non-final version, such as your submitted or accepted manuscript. See more below on understanding different article versions for sharing .

►►►How to check journal policies:  See MIT Libraries' list of policy excerpts from major publishers or the journal/publisher website.

For example, Taylor and Francis policy allows to:

Include your article Author’s Original Manuscript (AOM) or Accepted Manuscript(AM) , depending on the embargo period in your thesis or dissertation. The Version of Record cannot be used. https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/copyright-and-you/

Check if the article is distributed under a Creative Commons license. This may allow re-use.

►►►How to check journal's CC license:  See the journal/publisher website or contact the journal directly.

If the publisher requires copyright transfer, has no special provisions and does not publish under a CC license, you will need to contact them to request permission to include your article in your thesis. You can:

• Negotiate making the article available as part of the thesis in TSpace, ProQuest, and LAC Theses Portal; 
• Request an embargo [link to Lisa’ section on embargo] if the publisher only permits open sharing after some time post-publication;
• If permission is denied you may include in place of the chapter an abstract and a link to the article on the journal website.

If you have specific questions about your situation, publisher policy or author rights, contact the Scholarly Communications and Copyright Office at [email protected] for a consultation (best before you publish!)

Understanding different versions of a published article

A publisher may distinguish between the versions of an article that you may be allowed to include in your thesis:

• Submitted manuscript / pre-print - version you initially send in (often permitted)
• Accepted manuscript / post-print - version after peer review but before copyediting, layout editing, formatting, etc. (sometimes permitted; publisher may require an embargo/access restriction for a period of time)
• Version of record / final publisher’s PDF - version that appears in the journal (many publishers do not permit sharing this version)

►►►How to check article versions permitted for sharing:

• MIT Libraries’s list of policy excerpts from major publishers
• Sherpa/RoMEO database of publisher policies
• Journal’s website - usually under Information for Authors or Copyright/Permissions or Editorial Policy; or in the publication agreement if available online
• << Previous: Creative Commons Licenses for Theses
• Next: Turning Thesis into an Article >>
• Last Updated: Sep 15, 2023 3:23 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/thesis

Library links

• Library Home
• Renew items and pay fines
• Library hours
• Engineering
• UT Mississauga Library
• UT Scarborough Library
• Information Commons
• All libraries

University of Toronto Libraries 130 St. George St.,Toronto, ON, M5S 1A5 [email protected] 416-978-8450 Map About web accessibility . Tell us about a web accessibility problem . About online privacy and data collection .

© University of Toronto . All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.

Connect with us

• Find guidance
• Our organisation
• Core Practices
• Find a member
• Become a member
• Work with us

You are here

Home Resources Discussion documents

Best practice in theses publishing. March 2017

Introduction

Traditionally, theses for higher degrees were published by universities in hard copy only. Now increasingly, these are also archived and may be made freely available via university repositories. They may or may not have associated licenses such as those from Creative Commons which also allow reuse.

Questions have arisen at COPE forums and other venues as to whether publication of theses, especially freely available ones, should be considered as “prior publications” when work from a thesis is submitted for publication to a journal. This document sets out some of the issues and suggests principles to consider.

We welcome feedback on this discussion document, after which it will be published as a guidance document. We particularly welcome comments from individuals and groups working in the Arts and Humanities, where we recognize there may be different practices and expectations from what is described below.

Best practice for issues around theses publishing

What theses are relevant to publications?

There are two types of theses that are relevant to journal publishing. First, the traditional thesis that contains the first account of work done during the course of a higher degree, and which is written usually in the form of multiple chapters bound together. The work in these chapters is otherwise unpublished and is usually largely the work of one person, the person who is studying for the degree under supervision from one or more senior academics.

he second type of thesis – thesis by publication–is one that consists, in whole or part, of papers that have already been published in academic journals.

Authors, especially in the arts and humanities may, publish their thesis in its entirety with a commercial or non-commercial publisher in the form of a book or monograph after their degree has been conferred.

This is an extract. Refer to the PDF for the full document.

• Login to your account or register to post comments
• Ethical oversight

About this resource

Author  Developed by COPE Council Version 1  March 2017 How to cite this COPE Council. Best practice in theses publishing. March 2017. Version 1. 2017  https://doi.org/10.24318/ LQU1h9US

Our COPE materials are available to use under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non-commercial — You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works — You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. We ask that you give full accreditation to COPE with a link to our website:  publicationethics.org

Full page history

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

How to Submit a Paper for Publication in a Journal

• 4 minute read
• 89.5K views

Table of Contents

Whether you’ve done it before, or not, submitting a paper for publication in a journal is, to say the least, a process that brings great anxiety and stress. After all your hard work for many months, or even years, recognition is finally at your grasp. That is why there no room for mistakes.

What to Expect of the Scientific Publishing Process

If you are a beginner, you might be struggling to know exactly what to do. After all, it is a step-by-step process, sometimes with a lot of players and paperwork involved; it’s not always evident what to do next. An excellent, high-quality manuscript is the best way to give a good impression from the beginning, putting your paper on the right track for a successful submission. At Elsevier, with our Language Editing services , we not only revise your manuscript, but guarantee there are no text errors.

If, on the other hand, you have already published articles, you might have enough experience to know that each paper submission in a journal is different. Either the journal is different, or the context has changed, or the peers are new. You never know what can go right or wrong, other than the variable that lies under your control – that the manuscript is error-free and spot-on for successful acceptance. In this case, you might consider Elsevier’s professional Language Editing services to amend your text to the target journal’s requirements, helping you focus on other projects.

Scientific Paper Submission. Are you ready? Let’s go!

For many researchers, putting their paper through the professional journal submission process is stressful. Here is a simple to-do list which might help you go through all of it with some peace of mind:

• Use an external editing service, such as Elsevier’s Author Services if you need assistance with language.
• Free e-learning modules on preparing your manuscript can be found on Researcher Academy.
• Mendeley makes your life easier by helping you organize your papers, citations and references, accessing them in the cloud on any device, wherever you are.
• Do not rush submitting your article for publication Carefully re-read and revise your manuscript. Re-reading is essential in the research field and helps identify the most common problems and shortcomings in the manuscript, which might otherwise be overlooked. Often, reading your text out loud will uncover more errors than reading silently to yourself. If you are doubtful about the quality of your text, consider Elsevier’s Professional Language Editing services . Our professional team is trained to provide you with an optimal text for successful submission.
• Read the journal’s aims and scope to make sure they match your paper.
• Check whether you can submit – some journals are invitation only.
• Use the journal’s metrics to measure its impact. In fact, you can also check other additional info – like speed and reach to understand if it’s the right one for you.
• If you’re a post doc, check out our free access program.
• Read the aims and scope and author guidelines of your target journal carefully Once you think your manuscript is ready for submission, the next important step is to read the aims and scope of the journals in your target research area. Doing so will improve the chances of having your manuscript accepted for publishing.
• Submit a cover letter with the manuscript Never underestimate the importance of a cover letter addressed to the editor or editor-in-chief of the target journal. A good cover letter should underline 3 main aspects: the main theme of the paper, its originality/novelty and the relevance of the manuscript to the target journal.
• Make a good first impression with your title and abstract The title and abstract are incredibly important components of a manuscript as they are the first elements a journal editor sees. They create interest and curiosity about the whole work.

Now, what happens if your paper gets rejected by the journal ? It is, by no means, the end of the world. There are very real steps you can take to ultimately get published in a reputable journal.

The Science of Article Publishing

Article publishing is every researcher’s aim. It brings visibility and recognition, essential factors for those who intend to build a full career in research. However, most scientists feel handicapped or lost when it comes to conveying their findings or ideas to others. For many, it can be difficult to re-format a certain type of text to another, be aware of formatting requirements and translate their work into visually appealing outcomes. Additionally, keeping track of all the steps needed to submit an article for publication can be overwhelming and take too much time that could be spent doing new research.

At Elsevier, we believe everyone should be doing what they do best: in this case, leave research for scientists and leave the science of turning the best ideas into excellent quality text to our professionals.

Language Editing Services by Elsevier Author Services:

Find more about How to Submit a Paper for Publication in a Journal on Pinterest:

How to Write a Journal Article from a Thesis

Looking for Medical Editing Services

You may also like.

How to Make a PowerPoint Presentation of Your Research Paper

What is a Good H-index?

What is a Corresponding Author?

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

MIT Libraries logo MIT Libraries

Thesis content and article publishing

Journal publishers usually acquire the copyright to scholarly articles through a publication agreement with the author. Their policies then determine what authors can do with their work.

Below are publisher policies regarding graduate students’ reuse of their previously published articles in their theses, and policies on accepting journal submissions that first appeared in an author’s previously released thesis.

If an article is co-authored with a member of the MIT faculty, or if you have opted-in to an OA license , the MIT open access policy  is likely to apply to the article, which allows for the extension of additional rights to graduate student authors through MIT for reuse.  Short excerpts of published works may also be available for reuse under the MIT Libraries license agreements .

See this page for information about who owns the copyright to your thesis (generally, it’s either MIT or you).

Please contact Ask Scholarly Communications with questions or if you need information that does not yet appear below.

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

Reuse of author’s previously published article in author’s thesis

Check the terms of your publication agreement .

Submission of new article by author that first appeared as part of author’s thesis

Allows :  “ We do not regard dissertations/theses as prior publications.”

American Chemical Society

Allows : “Authors may reuse all or part of the Submitted, Accepted or Published Work in a thesis or dissertation that the author writes and is required to submit to satisfy the criteria of degree-granting institutions…. Appropriate citation of the Published Work must be made as follows “Reprinted with permission from [COMPLETE REFERENCE CITATION]. Copyright [YEAR] American Chemical Society.”

“If the thesis or dissertation to be published is in electronic format, a direct link to the Published Work must be included using the  ACS Articles on Request link.”

See also this FAQ for thesis info.

Each ACS journal has a specific policy on prior publication that is determined by the respective ACS Editor-in-Chief. Authors should consult these policies and/or contact the appropriate journal editorial office to ensure they understand the policy before submitting material for consideration.

American Geophysical Union

Allows : “If you wish to reuse your own article (or an amended version of it) in a new publication of which you are the author, editor or co-editor, prior permission is not required (with the usual acknowledgements). However, a formal grant of license can be downloaded free of charge from RightsLink by selecting “Author of this Wiley article” as your requestor type.”

Allows : “Previously published explicitly does not include oral or poster presentations, meeting abstracts or student theses/dissertations.”

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Allows : “ Upon publication of an article or paper in an AIAA journal or conference proceeding, authors can use in their own theses/dissertations (with permission of AIAA if required by copyright).”

From here : “In most cases when AIAA is the copyright holder of a work, authors will be automatically granted permission by AIAA to reprint their own material in subsequent works, to include figures, tables, and verbatim portions of text, upon request. Explicit permission should be sought from AIAA through Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) ; all reprinted material must be acknowledged and the original source cited in full.” 

American Institute of Physics

Allows : “A uthors do not need permission from AIP Publishing to reuse your own AIP Publishing article in your thesis or dissertation (please format your credit line: “Reproduced from [FULL CITATION], with the permission of AIP Publishing”)” Author agreement says the version of record can be used . 

Allows : Publishing the work in a thesis is not considered prior publication according to author warranties in the publication agreement.

American Meteorological Society

AMS seems to require permission. Email [email protected] . It can take 10 days to hear back. They will then ask that you include the complete bibliographic citation of the original source, as well as the following statement with that citation for each: © American Meteorological Society. Used with permission.

American Physical Society

Allows , “ provided the bibliographic citation and the APS copyright credit line are given on the appropriate pages.”

Allows Language from Physical Review journals page: “Publication of material in a master’s or doctoral thesis does not preclude publication of that material in the Physical Review journals.”

American Society for Clinical Investigation

After Jan 4, 2022 : “Effective with the January 4, 2022 issue of JCI, authors retain copyright on all articles, which are published with a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0).”

Prior to Jan 4, 2022 : “ Permission can be obtained via Copyright Clearance Center . Copyright or license information is noted on each article.”

Likely allows : D oesn’t explicitly call out theses but says posting on preprints isn’t prior publication. 

Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)

Allows : “Authors can include partial or complete papers of their own (and no fee is expected) in a dissertation as long as citations and DOI pointers to the Versions of Record in the ACM Digital Library are included. Authors can use any portion of their own work in presentations and in the classroom (and no fee is expected).”

Likely allows . Prior publication rules apply to “peer reviewed” publications.  

Cambridge University Press

Allows : “Permissions requests are waived if t he author of the work wishes to reproduce a single chapter (not exceeding 20 per cent of their work), journal article or shorter extract in a subsequent work (i.e. with a later publication date) of which he or she is to be the author, co-author or editor.”

Policies set by individual journals.

Allows : “ ​​ Use and share their works for scholarly purposes (with full acknowledgement of the original article): Include in a thesis or dissertation (provided this is not published commercially).”

Allows : “ Elsevier does not count publication of an academic thesis as prior publication.”

Emerald Publishing

Allows . Authors should use the submitted version or accepted manuscript version.  Use of the final published version is permitted in print, but not electronic versions of theses.

Allows : “We are happy for submissions to Emerald to include work that has previously formed part of your PhD or other academic thesis. Please submit your paper in the usual way but declare the existence of the uploaded thesis to the Editor of the journal. If the Editor wished to consider the paper further, the paper would go through our standard anonymised peer-review process.”

Allows , with some requirements

Theses not specifically addressed , but permitted subject to editorial discretion. Individual journals may have their own policies.

Institute of Physics

Allows. A uthor may use the final published version or figures/text, and should include citation and a link to the version of record. “When you transfer the copyright in your article to IOP, we grant back to you certain rights, including the right to include all or part of the Final Published Version of the article within any thesis or dissertation.”

Inter-Research Science Center

Reuse of published content is “generally free of charge,” but you must get permission. Email: [email protected]

Not addressed , except to say, “ Permission to re-use any previously published material must have been obtained by the authors from the copyright holders.”

International Speech Communication Association (ISCA) INTERSPEECH conference

Allows , with citation. “ISCA grants each author permission to use the article in that author’s dissertation….”

Mathematical Sciences Publishers

Allows , with citation. “The Author may use part or all of this Work or its image in any future works of his/her/their own.”

Unclear, but the author agreement says , “The Author warrants that the Work has not been published before, in any form except as a preprint.” We suggest asking your editor.

National Academy of Sciences

Allows , with citation. “ PNAS authors do not need to obtain permission in the following cases: …to include their articles as part of their dissertations.”

Not addressed . “ What constitutes prior publication…will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Allows , with citation. “ Authors have the right to reuse their article’s Version of Record, in whole or in part, in their own thesis.”

Allows . “ Nature Portfolio will consider submissions containing material that has previously formed part of a PhD or other academic thesis which has been published according to the requirements of the institution awarding the qualification.”

Oxford University Press

Journals have their own policies . OUP uses the Copyright Clearance Center for permissions . Contact your editor.

Royal Society of Chemistry

Allows , but says, “ Excerpts or material from your dissertation that have not been through peer review will generally be eligible for publication. However, if the excerpt from the dissertation included in your manuscript is the same or substantially the same as any previously published work, the editor may determine that it is not suitable for publication in the journal.”

Allows — in addition, a special agreement with Springer for MIT authors allows for reuse for scholarly and educational purposes.

Policy varies by journal but according to Springer: “There are no overriding ethical issues as long as the dual publication is transparent and cross referenced. Transparency is key, though a few journals might reject such an article for the reason of non-originality.”

Taylor & Francis

Allows — authors retain the right to “Include your article Author’s Original Manuscript (AOM) or Accepted Manuscript(AM), depending on the embargo period, in your thesis or dissertation. The Version of Record cannot be used.”

Allows : “ Y ou may share any version of your article with individual colleagues and students… as submission of thesis, or doctorate.”

Allows : “ The following types of “prior publication” do not present cause for concerns about duplicate or redundant publication: Dissertations and theses in university archives.”

Page last updated: April 10, 2024

Current students

• Staff intranet
• Find an event
• Research skills for HDR students
• Overview and planning

Theses including publications

• Originality
• Structuring your thesis

Literature reviews

• Writing up results
• Interpreting results

Under the Thesis and examinations higher degrees by research policy (pdf, 199KB) , a research thesis is a coherent and cohesive narrative describing a body of scholarly activity that adds to knowledge.

At the University a collection of published papers is not a thesis, neither is a publication on its own sufficient to warrant the award of a research degree.

However, you can, and should, include papers you have published in your thesis. A thesis including publications (also called a thesis with publications) is one where the core chapters of your thesis consist of papers you have submitted for publication, have been accepted for publication, or have already been published. See our information on preparing your thesis for how to indicate that your thesis contains material you have published as part of your candidature.

A thesis including publication is suited to certain disciplines where your study progresses in discrete stages or involves a sequence of related components; for example, a series of lab experiments or several artworks.

One of the benefits of doing a thesis including publications is that you’ll graduate with a number of publications to your credit. This will get your career as a researcher off to a good start.

You need to check with your faculty/school or department to see if a thesis including publications is possible and to find out their specific requirements. For more information see the Thesis and examination of higher degrees by research policy (pdf, 199KB) .

The following is a general guide to some common requirements for a thesis including publications.

Types of theses including publications

All chapters of your thesis can contain material previously published by you and need to be in a consistent format. Offprints are not considered chapters. These may be papers already published, submitted or accepted for publication, or not submitted.

Published papers need to be supplemented by an introduction (containing your aims and the context of the thesis) and a conclusion that synthesises the knowledge generated during your candidature. In some cases, thesis chapters are amended versions of published papers. The published papers are then put in the appendix.

Only papers researched and written during your candidature can be included in your thesis. Some faculties or schools allow you to include papers regardless of their stage of publication. In other cases, papers need to have been accepted for publication, not just submitted and awaiting acceptance. You need to check with your faculty/school or department regarding their requirements.

Papers need to be accepted by reputable, high-profile journals which require full peer review of contributions.

If you want your thesis to contain material you’ve published elsewhere, you need to get written permission from your publisher.

The University library has more information on copyright .

You should be the main contributor and/or lead author to the papers you include. This means you have been responsible for the key ideas, the development of the study and the writing of the paper. It’s possible to include papers co-written with other authors, as long as you have their permission (preferably in writing).

Find more information about authorship attribution statements and the format required.

A cohesive thesis

The papers you submit need to form a cohesive whole. They need to be linked thematically, having a consistent focus on a particular topic. They also need a cohesive structure, including an introduction, explanatory material between the chapters and a conclusion.

The introduction and conclusion are particularly important in tying your thesis together. Coherence can be made explicit throughout your thesis. You could link your chapters using:

• the list of publications, where you can note which publication corresponds to which chapter
• a concept map or a flowchart at the end of the introduction
• the literature review, where you refer to how the chapters fill in particular gaps in the literature
• a page or half-page introduction or 'bridging section' before each chapter of the body, or at the end of each chapter
• the discussion section, referring back to the various papers.

You don’t need all of these features, but the more links you can establish between the various parts of your thesis the more coherent it will be.

List of publications

You need to include a list of publications either before or after the table of contents. In this section, you can link the publications to the specific chapter in which they are found. Many theses also record the bibliographical details of the article on the title page of each chapter.

If you need to include a co-author contribution statement, this is usually put with the list of publications or before each chapter.

Find more information about authorship statements and the format required.

There are different ways you can give context for your research when you do the literature review for each paper. For example:

• paraphrasing rather than repeating the same information
• where you integrate reviews in the main literature review in the introduction and cut down the literature reviews in the articles
• making each literature review substantially different
• removing the article(s)’s literature review, but only if the published chapter is presented in manuscript form.

Discussion section

Your final discussion section draws together the main points from the discussion in each chapter into a single discussion. You need to avoid presenting or repeating in detail your ideas in the final discussion chapter by chapter or aim by aim, as this will not meet the requirements of a thesis. A way of doing this is to frame the discussion broadly, always in respect to ‘this thesis/research project’ or ‘this thesis’.

Reference lists

• When all articles are in journal format, their individual reference lists are included. This means the reference list at the end of the thesis contains only references from the introduction/literature review and discussion/conclusion.
• When all articles are in manuscript form, there is often no reference list attached to individual articles. Instead, all references are listed at the end of the thesis.
• Some theses have a separate reference list at the end of each chapter, including the introduction/conclusion.

Page numbers

Most theses show both the thesis page number and the journal article page numbers. However, you could omit the thesis page number.

This material was developed by the Learning Hub (Academic Language and Learning), which offers workshops, face-to-face consultations and resources to support your learning. Find out more about how they can help you develop your communication, research and study skills .

See our handout on Writing a thesis proposal (pdf, 341KB) .

Related links

• Thesis submission
• Research progress
• Research supervision
• Academic integrity
• Website feedback

Your feedback has been sent.

Sorry there was a problem sending your feedback. Please try again

You should only use this form to send feedback about the content on this webpage – we will not respond to other enquiries made through this form. If you have an enquiry or need help with something else such as your enrolment, course etc you can contact the Student Centre.

• Find an expert
• Media contacts

Student links

• How to log in to University systems
• Class timetables
• Our rankings
• Faculties and schools
• Research centres
• Campus locations
• Find a staff member
• Careers at Sydney
• Emergencies and personal safety

• Accessibility

This page has been archived and is no longer being updated regularly.

Degree In Sight

Publishing your dissertation

The process may seem daunting, but publishing your dissertation is doable if you follow some simple steps.

By Beth Azar

Although finishing your dissertation may be the final hurdle to completing your doctorate, getting it published may be an important step toward your career as a psychologist.

Indeed, academic psychologists are not the only ones expected to publish-research is increasingly a part of clinical positions, says University of Rochester Medical Center associate professor Robert Pollard Jr., PhD. And your dissertation may be the most logical place to start. Even if it's a small finding in a big field, your dissertation is probably a quality piece of work because it's been closely supervised by knowledgeable faculty, he notes. That doesn't mean it's going to be easy to winnow a traditional dissertation-averaging upward of 200 pages-to the lean 40 pages or less required by most journals.

Editing your dissertation means more than cutting out enough words to fit a journal's page-count.

"I can remember when I first thought about publishing my own dissertation," says Gary VandenBos, PhD, APA's publisher. "I was terrified. But the bottom line is, it's just work….It is not an overwhelming and impossible thing if you break it down into component pieces."

This process can be helped along if students think about publishing before they even start writing their dissertation, says Steven Yantis, PhD, director of graduate studies in Johns Hopkins University's department of psychological and brain sciences.

"I believe that the ultimate goal of publishing should be kept in mind so that the transformation from a dissertation format to a publishable piece is not a huge rewrite but a modest revision," he says.

And it's OK to pitch the idea of a short, pithy dissertation to your committee, says University of Victoria psychologist Steve Lindsay, PhD, editor of the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General .

"The dissertation is a symbol of competence to work as an independent scholar," he says, "so its form should be that used by independent scholars."

If even after going through the process of preparing your dissertation for publication, it's not accepted, consider it part of the learning process, says University of Tennessee psychologist Gordon Burghardt, PhD, editor of Comparative Psychology .

"I often have manuscripts rejected," he says. "It's a learning experience. The important thing is not to lose heart and to listen to what the editors and reviewers are telling you, so you can get it right the next time."

Of course, even if you write your dissertation with publication in mind, you will still need to make major revisions to trim content and appeal to a broader audience than your doctoral committee.

Pollard provides a step-by-step guide for preparing a dissertation for publication in The Internet Journal of Mental Health (Vol. 2, No. 2). The first thing students need to realize, he says, is that editing your dissertation means more than cutting out enough words to fit a journal's page-count.

"The entire organization and thrust of the manuscript must be reconceptualized," he says.

VandenBos agrees. "The U.S. model trains the candidate in exactly the type of writing that journals do not want," he says. "Dissertation committees take a very inclusive approach, asking students to explain everything. In contrast, scholarly articles are very exclusive, excluding everything that isn't germane to the core topic."

Some institutions are turning away from this traditional model, allowing students to write several publishable articles that they then tie together with an overarching introduction and discussion, says VandenBos. Even then, many students have a considerable amount of work to do to transform their dissertation into a journal article, notes Pollard, who suggests taking a multipronged approach:

Select a journal. Many journals have their own style and submission requirements, so picking a journal and writing to its requirements from the get-go will save time, Pollard advises.

Through suggestions of mentors and peers, develop a list of potential journals, including some that may be outside your field but related in some way to your research. Pare your list down based on recommendations from your dissertation committee, says VandenBos.

Be realistic, but optimistic when choosing what level of journal to submit to, he says. "I usually recommend that, to start, students shoot about a half-notch higher than they or their committee members think their paper warrants," says VandenBos. "You have to be a little arrogant and pumped up."

Prune and prioritize content. Create a list of bullet points of your major facts and findings and select the most important ones by asking yourself: Does the reader really need to know this? Does the reader already know this? Is this so important that the reader needs to be reminded of it?

Selecting core findings was the hardest part for Simon Fraser University psychologist Deborah Connolly, PhD, who wrote a 200-plus-page "monster" for her dissertation at the University of Victoria.

"With all the analyses and all the detail, the simple take-home message was hard for even me to find," she says. "Today I would say to a student, you have to figure out the five most important points. If you want, you can order them all from most to least important, but start by just focusing on the top five."

If you can't find just five, you may want to break your dissertation into several different articles, says Burghardt. If there's a small finding that's particularly timely, students could even pull out the essential data and methods and write up an extremely concise research brief for some publication as prestigious as Science or Nature, he says.

Use simple, direct language. Even after editing, dissertations revised for publication tend to be too long, with wordy, passive sentences, and lots of formatting errors, including flip-flopping between "I" and "we" and mistakes with references, say journal editors. Those kinds of mistakes aren't going to win you any fans, says Burghardt. Connolly learned this firsthand. Editors of Child Development rejected her revised dissertation because it read too much like a cut down dissertation, she says. "It was too dense, too complicated and too difficult to follow."

Taking reviewer comments to heart, Connolly revised her writing style keeping things simple and focusing on only the most critical findings. Editors at Applied Cognitive Psychology accepted the rewritten article with almost no revisions.

Beth Azar is a writer in Portland, Ore.

The dissertation, start to finish

This article is the sixth in a six-part gradPSYCH guide to starting, researching, writing and publishing your dissertation.

Letters to the Editor

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Can I publish parts of the Ph.D thesis as a paper in a journal?

I recently finished my PhD thesis which will be published as a book soon. Now I'm wondering if it's possible or allowed to submit parts to a journal?

Normally the process would be the other way round I think: Submitting papers and "gluing" them together for the thesis. I've read the guidelines of some journals which state "that the work described has not been published before" or that "Papers must present scientific results that are essentially new".

• publications

• 1 Could you be a bit more specific as to what you mean by "published as a book"? Are you simply making a few bound copies, are you self-publishing or is this going to an academic publisher? –  Pedro Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 15:49
• Oh sorry :) It is going to a publisher and can be ordered there. –  John Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 15:59
• 2 See also this complementary question . –  JeffE Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 19:53
• This question is probably field dependent. For example, in sociology in France it is usually not possible to publish in a journal something that has been made available on the web, (and books are the most important research outputs). –  Benoît Kloeckner Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 7:52
• The field of the dissertation is Management Information Systems. But the content is a mixture of biometrics and machine learning. –  John Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 12:46

2 Answers 2

As a general rule, you cannot publish anything as original research that has already been published. (You may be able to reprint it in other venues, but most research journals do not do this.)

Of course, the trick is what counts as "already published". Nowadays, many publishers (including all mathematics publishers, for example) do not count informal distribution on the internet as prior publication. It's common not to count extended abstracts from conference proceedings, although the journal may require some revisions or extensions. Nobody counts submitting a dissertation as prior publication, even if the university makes it available for download or purchase, and technical reports are generally in the same category.

On the other hand, publication as a "real book" definitely counts as prior publication and would rule out journals. Of course, this just brings up the question of what a "real book" is. Basically, if it's published by a serious academic publisher, with some nontrivial selection and editorial advice, then that counts as publication. On the other hand, if it's some random publisher printing copies of Ph.D. theses and selling them online, then you could make a strong case that it's not really published (and that this is not so different from ordering a dissertation copy).

However, I think you need to discuss this explicitly when submitting your paper. For example, you could add a sentence to your submission letter along the lines of "This work is based on my thesis from University X, which is available for sale by Y but has not been traditionally published". It's much better to deal with this upfront than to have someone later ask "Wait, why is someone selling copies of this work online?"

• 1 I think Dave Clarke and I fundamentally agree, but I felt it was worth expanding on the issues. –  Anonymous Mathematician Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 21:43
• Thanks for the answer! Basically that's what came to my mind upfront. The publisher will be a well known one, but it'll be published as a dissertation. This means there will be no editorial advice except in layout questions. Selection is based on the grade. So to sum up, I'll check the contract with the publisher and also ask the potential journal(s) if submission is allowed under this constraints. –  John Commented Aug 23, 2012 at 12:42
• If you are going to reuse some material in whole or part, you have to have permissions from the copyright holders. So the people you have to contact are the people who have contracted the book. Your situation is the reverse of what i've normally heard. Usually one turns the diss into papers, and then based on feedback, works those papers into the book. There the journal editors are usually happy to let you turn your short paper into part of a chapter in a published book. I suspect book editors are going to be less obliging, unless you can argue that the publications are going to help sell it. –  user10636 Commented Mar 2, 2014 at 12:24
• As a rule of thumb, I would say any publication with an ISBN/ISSN is an official publication, anything without that is nonofficial and OK for submitting to conference/journal. –  THN Commented Mar 11, 2019 at 14:59

In general, this is allowed, even encouraged.

The answer depends on what kind of book you are publishing. If it is the regular dissertation, then you can publish in journals. If it is a properly published book by Springer or equivalent, then I doubt that you can publish again.

• Thanks for the quick response! What do you mean by regular dissertation? It'll be published as a book available on amazon, etc. in German. Why does this distinction matter in your opinion? –  John Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 15:55
• If it's published by a scientific publisher, then you (probably) cannot republish it as papers. If it is just published in the dissertation series, then you can. Check with the publisher. –  Dave Clarke Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 17:24
• 3 @John: If you are dealing with a real publisher, you will sign a contract. Check the terms of your contract. –  Jukka Suomela Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 17:47
• Ok, thanks for your responses so far! Yes indeed I'm currently waiting for the contract and I'll check it. I was wondering whether (given the contract with the publisher of the book permits it) a journal accepts content, which has been published in some altered form already. As the dissertation is in German, I'll have to rewrite the parts and translate them, so it won't be exactly the same. –  John Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 18:46
• 5 Yeah, whether the journals approve is at least as big an issue as whether the dissertation publisher does. –  Anonymous Mathematician Commented Aug 22, 2012 at 21:44

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged phd publications journals thesis ..

• Featured on Meta
• Upcoming sign-up experiments related to tags

Hot Network Questions

• What's the meaning of "nai gar"?
• Will shading an AC condenser reduce cost or improve effectiveness?
• How does the router know to send packets to a VM on bridge mode?
• How much variation in the transimpedance gain of the TIA is acceptable?
• Homebrew spell to improve familiar link before combat
• Fairy Tale where parents have dozens of kids and give them all the same name
• What exactly is beef bone extract, beef extract, beef fat (all powdered form) and where can I find it?
• Why can Ethernet NICs bridge to VirtualBox and most Wi-Fi NICs don't?
• Does anyone know what the heck this tool is? I got it in a box lot or tools and dont have a clue
• Can God transcend human logic and reasoning?
• How do I get my D&D group to engage to a minimum
• Are both vocal cord and vocal chord correct?
• What is this weapon used in The Peacemaker?
• Are 1/20 undocumented immigrants married to American citizens?
• How do Blok and the other astronaut do a spacewalk to repair the ship? Didn’t they already land?
• Extending normal filters
• Can a video game developer restrict how people stream game content?
• Can a unique position be deduced if pieces are replaced by checkers (can see piece color but not type)
• Output the Steiner system S(5,8,24)
• Individual invest on each asset
• What US checks and balances prevent the FBI from raiding politicians unfavorable to the federal government?
• Why is ACAT not identifying the difference between 2 bridge sites on a surface slab?
• Co-authors with little contribution
• Is this professor being unnecessarily harsh or did I actually make a mistake?

Revising Your Dissertation for Publication

While a dissertation’s in-depth research and analysis can provide a strong foundation for a book, the dissertation itself is not a book and will not be published by an academic press without substantial revisions. Some acquisitions editors are interested first books, especially if they bring new perspectives and fresh ideas to a field, while others do not often publish first books. If you are considering submitting your dissertation for publication, we recommend that you contact editors at university presses that publish in your subject area for guidance on revising your work. Many editors prefer to be involved in the early stages of this process so they can advise you on how to structure the book and your arguments to create a publishable book. Editors generally require changes in the length, content, tone, and style of a dissertation in order to produce a book that will appeal to buyers in the academic market. Read more about submitting a proposal in our Scholarly Publishing Guide .

Below are selected resources to help you revise your dissertation for publication as a book or journal article(s).

Advice from publishers

• Harvard University Press
• Palgrave Macmillan
• Rowman & Littlefield
• Taylor & Francis
• University of North Carolina Press
• Yale University Press
• Publisher Policies on using content in both a thesis or dissertation and an article (from MIT Libraries)
• From Dissertation to Book by William Germano (Lauinger Library, 4th Floor, PN162 .G37 2013)
• Revising Your Dissertation, Updated Edition : Advice from Leading Editors (updated edition, 2008) edited by Beth Luey (online; GU NetID and password required)
• From Dissertation to Book , Duke University (February 27, 2018)
• From Dissertation to Book ( full transcript ), Harvard University (December 17, 2010)
• How To Turn Your Dissertation into a Book , Yale University (April 6, 2016)
• From Dissertation to Book by Leonard Cassuto (Chronicle of Higher Education, May 30, 2011)
• From Dissertation to Published Book (lanugageandphilosophy.com report on an American Comparative Literature Association workshop)
• Give It a Rest by Laura Portwood-Stacer (Inside Higher Ed, August 6, 2019)
• The Stages of Revising a Dissertation into a Book by Amy Benson Brown (Journal of Scholarly Publishing, vol. 52 no. 2, 2021, p. 127-140) (GU NetID and password required)
• Turning Your Dissertation into a Book (University of Washington)
• Publishing your Dissertation (American Psychological Association)

• [email protected] / [email protected]
• Create Account
• Join to Connect:

IJSRP provides renowned platform to all the researchers/scholars to get their valuable thesis/monograph or doctoral dissertation published as book.

If you are about to finish your research work and want to get your thesis/monograph published send your original works to [email protected] . whether it's a monograph, master's thesis or doctoral dissertation, we accept research in all disciplines/subjects..

Thesis Invited For Publication in IJAR!!!

IJAR offers thesis publication services to give authors/ doctoral students a global and wide platform to showcase their valuable work. Whether it is a master’s dissertation, M. Phil dissertation or a doctoral thesis, these are grey literature that is not widely accessible. But, with the help of IJAR, the research and findings of thesis will have a worldwide visibility and can greatly contribute to their respective fields of creativity.

If you’re about to finish your Ph. D. thesis and want to get your work to be globally known, then option for our thesis publication services and get your work recognized by one and all.

Moreover, the authors hold full ownership of the completed work and are entitled to sell or distribute copies of the book.

IJAR feels happy to mention here that for every author whose thesis is published, a permanent link/ page will be created on our website with his name and full bio data. Moreover, after publication, authors will have access to make suitable changes in their respective webpage.

IJAR Journal/ publication is open access, which means that your thesis is available to anyone in the world to download / read for free directly from the website. Your thesis will be accessible from Google Scholar and Google via Title/ Author name etc.

List of Thesis Publication (In Process)

Click here to check the list of Thesis Published.

Thesis Submission

Author need to fill the Online Thesis Form and mail the thesis and the filled thesis form to [email protected] . All the authors need to specify “Thesis Publication” in subject line of the email. If you need any assistance regarding thesis submission, kindly mail us, we will be happy to serve you…

--> Competition vs. Collaboration in Business Negotiations: The Prevailing Bargaining Practices in West African Marketplaces

--> AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE PATTERN IN HEALTHY NORMOTENSIVE SUBJECTS

--> EFFECTIVENESS OF TEACHERS READING STRATEGIES AND THE READING PERFORMANCE AND CAUSES OFFAILURES IN READING OF GRADE IV-VI LEARNERS

--> An Analytical Study of Upayakausalya (Skillful Means) with Special Reference to Saddharmapundarikasutra

--> TOURISM INFRASTRUCTURE AND LOCAL TOURISM IN CHENNAI CITY - A SPATIAL ANALYSIS

--> A STUDY FOR DIAGNOSING AND TREATMENT OF CHRONIC AND RECURRENT DISEASES USING DATA MINING TECHNIQUES

--> Colonization of the Womans Body: Sociological Analysis

--> Benign Versus Malignant THYROID NODULES: US differentiation, With Tissue Diagnosis as standard reference

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH CULTURE SOCIETY (IJRCS) ISSN: 2456-6683

Impact Factor – 9.241 | UGC Approved Journal Number : 64291 | Peer-Reviewed, Refereed, Indexed International Research Journal |

THESIS PUBLICATION

Thesis Publication / Dissertation Publication:  With  ISBN  (Print)  /  ISBN  &  DOIs  (Online)  

We publish academic thesis/dissertation as a thesis monograph with ISBN and (if online with DOIs)  which will get deposited in the thesis database. All submitted manuscripts will be internally reviewed and the author should expect a number of modifications as per the editor’s instruction.

Thesis publication is often considered essential if you wish to expand your career in academia or a related profession. Publishing your thesis/dissertation as a book monograph can be used as a building block to an academic career, to influence your discipline and expand your knowledge of the field. As a thesis, your work had a very small readership, but when you get published online it should attract a much larger readership.

Who Can Submit?

All students whose thesis / dissertation has already been approved from their institution and a degree has already been awarded based on that thesis / dissertation can submit their thesis to publish in book form as a thesis monograph. The supervisor can also submit their student’s thesis / dissertation on behalf of the student by providing the required document and student’s contact information.

Book soft copy submission Format & Style: 

Thesis / Dissertation  Publication  : (Hard bound cover)

Authors have to send / submit full soft copy for review and proofreading with contents and details in editable MS word file format. ( Normal page layout, Page size – A4, Font size -12, headings/sub titles – 12 Bold,  Line space – 1.15  OR  1.5 in single column with at least  normal margin – 2.54 cm  on all sides.   Author / Edited Book Editor need to send us  2 files in only editable M.S word format :-  File 1). All prior pages – Preface to Table of Contents,   and  File  2).  Introduction to  References, Annexure etc.  

Full Soft copy in 2 Files: ( with own selection cover image/ photos )

File – 1.  (Prior Pages in editable M.S. word file format) 

• Page 1. –  Title of the Book  and   Author’s name / Edited Book Editor’s  Designation(s), Affiliation 
• Page 2.  Copyright Page / Publisher page ( leave it blank)
• Page 3.  Author’s – Supervisor’s detail (Name, designation, affiliation, email id/mobile number); we may contact the supervisor for verification
• Page 4.  Scanned copy of the thesis approval certificate.
• Scanned copy of the degree certificate (or provisional or mark sheet if Thesis Title mentioned in the mark sheet) awarded based on the said thesis.
• Page 5.   Preface
• Page 6.   About the Book
• Page 7.   Acknowledgement
• Other pages as per author’s / book editor’s choice.
• Table of Content page/ Index (with main headings in serial number as 1., 2., 3., …..)                     

File – 2  (Main Book contents –  all in a single file – in editable M.S. word file format )

• Introduction   to   References,  Annexure etc.    (in continuation of page number to File 1.)

References : should be cited in the style prescribed in the publication manual of  (APA / MLA  Or any specific).

Cover page Photos/Images:   Authors/Book Editors can send us own choice of photos/images as clear .jpg/.png file in email attachment.

Figures & Tables:  Each figure, table, Equations, Images should be numbered and titled. The position of the figure or table should be indicated in the text on a separate line  at center. i.e Table 1 (title), Fig.1 (title).

Language:    We publish books in English, Hindi, Gujarati, Marathi, Sanskrit Languages only.

Thesis Publication Processing Charge:

You cannot copy content of this page

Thesis is an international research Journal with double-blind peer review, which is published by AAB College in Prishtina. The journal presents an international forum for empirical, qualitative, critical and interpretative studies, on interdisciplinary research in the Social Sciences and Humanities.

Aims and Scope

Thesis is an international research journal with double-blind peer review

All Issues - Archive

See all volumes and Issues or download the latest Issue

Instructions for authors

Thesis is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record.We encourage authors

Latest News

Recent Blogs

• International Research Journal, Thesis – Call for Papers

Didn't find what you were looking for?

Thesis is peer review journal published by AAB College

Effective Publication Strategies: 12 Tips for Selecting the Right Journal for Your Research and Scholarship

Monday, June 24, 2024 12:00 PM - 1:00 PM

Add to Calendar: Add to Calendar 2024-06-24 12:00:00 2024-06-24 13:00:00 Effective Publication Strategies: 12 Tips for Selecting the Right Journal for Your Research and Scholarship Learn key strategies for finding the right home for your scholarship and maximizing your publication success while exploring how the recently updated AAMC Group on Educational Affairs (GEA) Medical Education Scholarship Research and Evaluation (MESRE) Annotated Bibliography can serve as an essential, trusted resource in your journey to make an impact in the field of academic medicine. Online Weatherhead School of Management Weatherhead School of Management UTC public

Event Details

Learn key strategies for finding the right home for your scholarship and maximizing your publication success while exploring how the recently updated AAMC Group on Educational Affairs (GEA) Medical Education Scholarship Research and Evaluation (MESRE) Annotated Bibliography can serve as an essential, trusted resource in your journey to make an impact in the field of academic medicine.

• Introduction
• Conclusions
• Article Information

Within each study part, participants were randomly assigned to receive either muvalaplin or placebo in a 6:2 ratio for the single ascending dose part, and in a 8:2 ratio for the first 4 cohorts and 15:2 ratio in the last cohort of the multiple ascending dose study part. Two participants were given sentinel 1-mg doses in the single ascending dose part of the study prior to dosing the full cohort. The primary analysis assessed safety.

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; ECG, electrocardiogram.

A, Plasma muvalaplin concentration-time profile after a single oral administration of muvalaplin in healthy participants.

B, Plasma muvalaplin concentration-time profiles 0 to 24 hours of participants with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels (≥30 mg/dL) after receiving the first dose on day 1.

C, Plasma muvalaplin concentration-time profiles 0 to 24 hours in participants with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels (≥30 mg/dL) after receiving the last dose on day 14.

Dosing began on day 1, and the values shown from day 1 are from before dosing began.

A, The absolute change in lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) levels in participants with levels of 30 mg/dL or higher.

B, The mean percent change from baseline in Lp(a) levels over time.

C, The absolute change in plasminogen activity.

D, The mean percent change from baseline in plasminogen activity in the same participants and during the same time shown in panels A and B.

Data markers indicate the mean; error bars, SEM.

Study Protocol

Statistical Analysis Plan

eTable 1. Summary Statistics of Muvalaplin Dose Proportionality Analysis

eTable 2. Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events by System Organ Class and Preferred Term (Single Ascending Dose Part)

eTable 3. Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events by System Organ Class and Preferred Term (Multiple Ascending Dose Part)

eFigure 1 . Study Design

eFigure 2. Lipoprotein Panel Change vs. Time (Multiple Ascending Dose Part)

eFigure 3. Other Biomarkers Panel Change vs. Time (Multiple Ascending Dose Part)

eFigure 4. Frequency Distribution of Lp(a) Concentration at Baseline

eFigure 5. Lp(a) Concentration at Baseline on a Per-Patient Basis

eFigure 6. Scatterplot of Concentration Changes From Baseline

Data Sharing Statement

• Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Diseases JAMA JAMA Insights July 27, 2021 This JAMA Insights Clinical Update discusses various clinical aspects of lipoprotein(a), including association with cardiovascular disease risk, measurement, guideline recommendations, and emerging therapies. Hannah Miksenas, BA; James L. Januzzi Jr, MD; Pradeep Natarajan, MD, MMSc
• Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lp(a) Production in Individuals With Elevated Plasma Lp(a) JAMA Preliminary Communication May 3, 2022 This phase 1 study evaluated the safety and tolerability of 4 different doses of a short interfering RNA designed to reduce hepatic production of apolipoprotein(a) and assessed associated changes in plasma concentrations of lipoprotein(a), compared with placebo, among individuals with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels and no known cardiovascular disease. Steven E. Nissen, MD; Kathy Wolski, MPH; Craig Balog, BS; Daniel I. Swerdlow, MD, PhD; Alison C. Scrimgeour, MSc; Curtis Rambaran, MD; Rosamund J. Wilson, PhD; Malcom Boyce, MD; Kausik K. Ray, MD; Leslie Cho, MD; Gerald F. Watts, MD, PhD; Michael Koren, MD; Traci Turner, MD; Erik S. Stroes, MD, PhD; Carrie Melgaard, MS; Giles V. Campion, MD, PhD
• siRNAs—A New Class of Medicines JAMA JAMA Insights June 27, 2023 This Genomics and Precision Health article explains how small interfering RNA can modulate disease targets considered “undruggable” by small molecules and biologics. Anastasia Khvorova, PhD
• Lepodisiran, an Extended-Duration Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lipoprotein(a) JAMA Original Investigation December 5, 2023 This randomized clinical trial compares a single dose of lepodisiran vs placebo to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and effects on lipoprotein(a) concentrations in adults without cardiovascular disease and with lipoprotein(a) serum concentrations of 75 nmol/L or greater at baseline. Steven E. Nissen, MD; Helle Linnebjerg, PhD; Xi Shen, PhD; Kathy Wolski, MPH; Xiaosu Ma, PhD; Shufen Lim, PhD; Laura F. Michael, PhD; Giacomo Ruotolo, MD, PhD; Grace Gribble, MS; Ann Marie Navar, MD, PhD; Stephen J. Nicholls, MBBS, PhD
• Lipoprotein(a) and its Significance in Cardiovascular Disease JAMA Cardiology Review July 1, 2022 This narrative review evaluates evidence of an association between elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and aortic valve stenosis. Freddy Duarte Lau, MD; Robert P. Giugliano, MD, SM

See More About

Select your interests.

Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.

• Academic Medicine
• Acid Base, Electrolytes, Fluids
• Allergy and Clinical Immunology
• American Indian or Alaska Natives
• Anesthesiology
• Anticoagulation
• Art and Images in Psychiatry
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assisted Reproduction
• Bleeding and Transfusion
• Caring for the Critically Ill Patient
• Challenges in Clinical Electrocardiography
• Climate and Health
• Climate Change
• Clinical Challenge
• Clinical Decision Support
• Clinical Implications of Basic Neuroscience
• Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Consensus Statements
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Critical Care Medicine
• Cultural Competency
• Dental Medicine
• Dermatology
• Diabetes and Endocrinology
• Diagnostic Test Interpretation
• Drug Development
• Electronic Health Records
• Emergency Medicine
• End of Life, Hospice, Palliative Care
• Environmental Health
• Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
• Facial Plastic Surgery
• Gastroenterology and Hepatology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Genomics and Precision Health
• Global Health
• Guide to Statistics and Methods
• Hair Disorders
• Health Care Delivery Models
• Health Care Economics, Insurance, Payment
• Health Care Quality
• Health Care Reform
• Health Care Safety
• Health Care Workforce
• Health Disparities
• Health Inequities
• Health Policy
• Health Systems Science
• History of Medicine
• Hypertension
• Images in Neurology
• Implementation Science
• Infectious Diseases
• Innovations in Health Care Delivery
• JAMA Infographic
• Law and Medicine
• Leading Change
• Less is More
• LGBTQIA Medicine
• Lifestyle Behaviors
• Medical Coding
• Medical Devices and Equipment
• Medical Education
• Medical Education and Training
• Medical Journals and Publishing
• Mobile Health and Telemedicine
• Narrative Medicine
• Neuroscience and Psychiatry
• Notable Notes
• Nutrition, Obesity, Exercise
• Obstetrics and Gynecology
• Occupational Health
• Ophthalmology
• Orthopedics
• Otolaryngology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Care
• Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
• Patient Care
• Patient Information
• Performance Improvement
• Performance Measures
• Perioperative Care and Consultation
• Pharmacoeconomics
• Pharmacoepidemiology
• Pharmacogenetics
• Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology
• Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
• Physical Therapy
• Physician Leadership
• Population Health
• Primary Care
• Professional Well-being
• Professionalism
• Psychiatry and Behavioral Health
• Public Health
• Pulmonary Medicine
• Regulatory Agencies
• Reproductive Health
• Research, Methods, Statistics
• Resuscitation
• Rheumatology
• Risk Management
• Scientific Discovery and the Future of Medicine
• Shared Decision Making and Communication
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports Medicine
• Stem Cell Transplantation
• Substance Use and Addiction Medicine
• Surgical Innovation
• Surgical Pearls
• Teachable Moment
• Technology and Finance
• The Art of JAMA
• The Arts and Medicine
• The Rational Clinical Examination
• Tobacco and e-Cigarettes
• Translational Medicine
• Trauma and Injury
• Treatment Adherence
• Ultrasonography
• Users' Guide to the Medical Literature
• Vaccination
• Venous Thromboembolism
• Veterans Health
• Women's Health
• Workflow and Process
• Wound Care, Infection, Healing

Others Also Liked

• Download PDF
• X Facebook More LinkedIn

Nicholls SJ , Nissen SE , Fleming C, et al. Muvalaplin, an Oral Small Molecule Inhibitor of Lipoprotein(a) Formation : A Randomized Clinical Trial . JAMA. 2023;330(11):1042–1053. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.16503

Manage citations:

© 2024

• Permissions

Muvalaplin, an Oral Small Molecule Inhibitor of Lipoprotein(a) Formation : A Randomized Clinical Trial

• 1 Victorian Heart Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
• 2 Cleveland Clinic Coordinating Center for Clinical Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
• 3 Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana
• JAMA Insights Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Diseases Hannah Miksenas, BA; James L. Januzzi Jr, MD; Pradeep Natarajan, MD, MMSc JAMA
• Preliminary Communication Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lp(a) Production in Individuals With Elevated Plasma Lp(a) Steven E. Nissen, MD; Kathy Wolski, MPH; Craig Balog, BS; Daniel I. Swerdlow, MD, PhD; Alison C. Scrimgeour, MSc; Curtis Rambaran, MD; Rosamund J. Wilson, PhD; Malcom Boyce, MD; Kausik K. Ray, MD; Leslie Cho, MD; Gerald F. Watts, MD, PhD; Michael Koren, MD; Traci Turner, MD; Erik S. Stroes, MD, PhD; Carrie Melgaard, MS; Giles V. Campion, MD, PhD JAMA
• JAMA Insights siRNAs—A New Class of Medicines Anastasia Khvorova, PhD JAMA
• Original Investigation Lepodisiran, an Extended-Duration Short Interfering RNA Targeting Lipoprotein(a) Steven E. Nissen, MD; Helle Linnebjerg, PhD; Xi Shen, PhD; Kathy Wolski, MPH; Xiaosu Ma, PhD; Shufen Lim, PhD; Laura F. Michael, PhD; Giacomo Ruotolo, MD, PhD; Grace Gribble, MS; Ann Marie Navar, MD, PhD; Stephen J. Nicholls, MBBS, PhD JAMA
• Review Lipoprotein(a) and its Significance in Cardiovascular Disease Freddy Duarte Lau, MD; Robert P. Giugliano, MD, SM JAMA Cardiology

Question   Can muvalaplin, an orally administered small molecule inhibitor of lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) formation, achieve safe and tolerable plasma concentrations adequate to reduce steady-state Lp(a) levels without modulating plasminogen activity in humans?

Findings   In this first-in-human phase 1 study involving healthy participants, muvalaplin administered orally as single ascending doses ranging from 1 mg to 800 mg and as multiple ascending doses ranging from 30 mg to 800 mg for 14 days caused dose-dependent plasma concentration increases. Muvalaplin administration was not associated with concerns about safety or tolerability, and it reduced Lp(a) levels but not plasminogen activity.

Meaning   The observed safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and exploratory pharmacodynamics of muvalaplin in healthy participants support further clinical evaluation in patients with elevated Lp(a) levels.

Importance   Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is associated with atherosclerotic disease and aortic stenosis. Lp(a) forms by bonding between apolipoprotein(a) (apo[a]) and apo B 100 . Muvalaplin is an orally administered small molecule that inhibits Lp(a) formation by blocking the apo(a)-apo B 100 interaction while avoiding interaction with a homologous protein, plasminogen.

Objective   To determine the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamic effects of muvalaplin.

Design, Setting, and Participants   This phase 1 randomized, double-blind, parallel-design study enrolled 114 participants (55 assigned to a single-ascending dose; 59 assigned to a multiple-ascending dose group) at 1 site in the Netherlands.

Interventions   The single ascending dose treatment evaluated the effect of a single dose of muvalaplin ranging from 1 mg to 800 mg or placebo taken by healthy participants with any Lp(a) level. The multiple ascending dose treatment evaluated the effect of taking daily doses of muvalaplin (30 mg to 800 mg) or placebo for 14 days in patients with Lp(a) levels of 30 mg/dL or higher.

Main Outcomes and Measures   Outcomes included safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and exploratory pharmacodynamic biomarkers.

Results   Among 114 randomized (55 in the single ascending dose group: mean [SD] age, 29 [10] years, 35 females [64%], 2 American Indian or Alaska Native [4%], 50 White [91%], 3 multiracial [5%]; 59 in the multiple ascending dose group: mean [SD] age 32 [15] years; 34 females [58%]; 3 American Indian or Alaska Native [5%], 6 Black [10%], 47 White [80%], 3 multiracial [5%]), 105 completed the trial. Muvalaplin was not associated with tolerability concerns or clinically significant adverse effects. Oral doses of 30 mg to 800 mg for 14 days resulted in increasing muvalaplin plasma concentrations and half-life ranging from 70 to 414 hours. Muvalaplin lowered Lp(a) plasma levels within 24 hours after the first dose, with further Lp(a) reduction on repeated dosing. Maximum placebo-adjusted Lp(a) reduction was 63% to 65%, resulting in Lp(a) plasma levels less than 50 mg/dL in 93% of participants, with similar effects at daily doses of 100 mg or more. No clinically significant changes in plasminogen levels or activity were observed.

Conclusion   Muvalaplin, a selective small molecule inhibitor of Lp(a) formation, was not associated with tolerability concerns and lowered Lp(a) levels up to 65% following daily administration for 14 days. Longer and larger trials will be required to further evaluate safety, tolerability, and effect of muvalaplin on Lp(a) levels and cardiovascular outcomes.

Trial Registration   ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04472676

The residual risk of cardiovascular events, despite optimal lowering of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentration, supports the need to develop new therapies that modify additional risk factors involved in the pathogenesis of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Increasing evidence has suggested a causal role of lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) in both atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis. 1 Observations from cohort 2 and genetic 3 - 5 studies directly associate increasing Lp(a) levels with increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Although Lp(a) apheresis may be used to lower Lp(a) levels in some patients, there are no pharmacological agents currently approved for lowering Lp(a) levels. 6 In recent years, several therapeutic approaches have been developed that selectively target Lp(a) by reducing hepatic synthesis of apolipoprotein(a) (apo[a]). Initial studies demonstrated that Lp(a) was lowered by approximately 80% with an antisense oligonucleotide 7 and by up to 98% with RNA interference. 8 , 9 These agents are now being investigated in large clinical trials to evaluate the effect Lp(a) lowering has on cardiovascular outcomes. However, each of these approaches involves injectable therapies. Development of an oral agent that specifically lowers Lp(a) could provide a therapeutic alternative that may enable broader use.

Lp(a) is formed via a covalent bond of apo(a) to an apo B 100 protein on an LDL-like particle. 10 , 11 This process involves initial noncovalent binding of apo(a) kringle IV domains 7 and 8 to lysine residues of apo B 100 in the hepatocyte and the space of Disse, followed by the formation of a covalent disulfide bond. Muvalaplin is a small molecule Lp(a) inhibitor that disrupts the initial noncovalent interaction between apo(a) and apo B 100 , thus preventing the disulfide bond and the formation of Lp(a). This approach mimics naturally occurring variants in apo(a) that are unable to interact with apo B 100 , resulting in low Lp(a) levels ( Figure 1 ). 12 , 13 Preclinical studies demonstrated that muvalaplin-mediated reductions in Lp(a) formation in assembly reactions in vitro and in circulating Lp(a) levels in cynomolgus monkeys treated with muvalaplin (N. Diaz, et al, unpublished data, Eli Lilly and Co, 2023). Muvalaplin is the first oral agent specifically developed to lower Lp(a) levels. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and exploratory pharmacodynamic biomarker effects of muvalaplin in a phase 1 trial, representing the initial evaluation of its effects in humans.

This single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 study of muvalaplin (LY3473329) was conducted in 2 parts at the ICON facility in Groningen, the Netherlands ( Figure 2 ). The first part of study was to evaluate the effect of only 1 dose of muvalaplin in ascending increments (range, 1 mg to 800 mg) by healthy participants. The second part of the study was to evaluate the effect of muvalaplin taken as a single daily dose in ascending increments (range, 30 mg to 800 mg) taken over 14 days by healthy participants with elevated Lp(a) plasma levels (≥30 mg/dL).

The study was sponsored and designed by Eli Lilly and Company. The study protocol was approved by an independent ethics committee and was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and in compliance with current regulations and standards of Good Clinical Practice. All participants provided written informed consent. The sponsor collected the data, and the statistical analyses were performed by ICON, a contract research organization. The data tables with all trial results were transferred to the sponsor and the Victorian Heart Institute, Monash University, for further analysis. The manuscript figures and tables were produced by academic and sponsor-employed authors. The first draft of the manuscript was written by the lead author and modified based on comments by other authors including those employed by the sponsor; however, the final decision on content was retained by the lead author (S.J.N.), who vouches for the accuracy and completeness of the data and for the fidelity of the trial to the protocol, available in Supplement 1 . (The statistical analysis plan is available in Supplement 2 .)

Eligible participants were healthy adults aged 18 through 69 years, with a body mass index of 30 or less (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared). Participants randomized to the single ascending dose group were enrolled independently of their Lp(a) levels. Participants randomized to the multiple ascending dose group were required to have an Lp(a) concentration of 30 mg/dL or more. Female participants with childbearing potential and male participants agreed to use a reliable method of birth control throughout the study and for 105 days following the last dose of study drug. Race was determined by self-selection from closed categories, which we collect as standard practice.

Participants in the single ascending dose group were randomly assigned to receive either muvalaplin or placebo in a 6:2 ratio. For the first cohort, 2 participants received sentinel dosing (1 each with muvalaplin and placebo), with subsequent administration to the remaining participants in each cohort following review by the sponsor of the safety data through the 24-hour period following dosing. The single ascending dose levels studied were 1 mg, 10 mg, 30 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, 400 mg, and 800 mg (eFigure 1 in Supplement 3 ).

Participants in the multiple ascending dose group were randomly assigned to receive either muvalaplin or placebo in an 8:2 ratio in all but the last cohort, which used a 15:2 ratio. After an 8-hour fast, participants orally ingested either the study drug or placebo once a day for 14 days (eFigure 1 in Supplement 3 ). The planned dosage levels for the multiple ascending dose group were selected based on safety and pharmacokinetic data from the single ascending dose part of the study: 30 mg, 100 mg, 300 mg, 500 mg, and 800 mg daily. Participants, investigators, and clinical research unit staff who conducted trial-related activities or with the ability to influence study outcomes were blinded to muvalaplin and placebo treatment.

Safety assessments included monitoring adverse events, clinical laboratory evaluations, vital signs, 12-lead electrocardiogram, physical examination, and body weight. Muvalaplin plasma pharmacokinetics were estimated via noncompartmental analysis of plasma concentration-time data. Exploratory pharmacodynamic monitoring involved assessment of Lp(a), total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, and apo B 100 levels. Quantitative measurement of Lp(a) in human serum was measured with the Atellica CH Analyzer (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics), calibrated using Atellica CH Lp(a) CAL. The Lp(a) assay provides results from 10.00 mg/dL to 85.00 mg/dL. Because a high percentage of sequence identity is shared between apo(a) and plasminogen, 11 additional pharmacodynamic biomarkers were monitored, including plasminogen concentration, plasminogen activity, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, plasminogen activator inhibitor 1, tissue plasminogen activator antigen, and α 2 -antiplasmin.

The sample size for the single ascending dose cohort was typical for first-in-human studies designed to address the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic objectives with no formal power analyses. The sample size for the multiple ascending dose cohort was typical for a first-in-human multiple-dose study, except for the final cohort. The sample size for the final cohort was determined through simulations using FACTS version 6.4 software, to detect an Lp(a) decrease of at least 60% (placebo-adjusted) 90% of the time if the true decrease was 75% or more. Placebo-treated participants from each cohort were pooled into a single-treatment group within each part of the study. Pharmacokinetic and exploratory pharmacodynamic analyses were conducted using data from all participants who received at least 1 dose of muvalaplin drug and had evaluable data. In addition, exploratory pharmacodynamic analyses included participants who received at least 1 dose of placebo. Results are summarized by dosage level using descriptive statistics. Analyses for the primary objective of safety were conducted for all enrolled participants.

Screening of participants commenced in August 2020 and the final follow-up visit was conducted in November 2021. A total of 114 participants were enrolled in the study (55 in the single ascending dose group and 59 in the multiple ascending dose group). Of these participants, 89 were treated with muvalaplin and 25 were treated with placebo ( Figure 2 ). A total of 105 participants completed the study ( Figure 2 ). Baseline demographics and medical history were similar between participants treated with muvalaplin and placebo in each treatment group ( Table 1 ). Participants in the single ascending dose group were a mean (SD) age of 29 (10) years, 35 females (64%), 2 American Indian or Alaska Native (4%), 50 White (91%), and 3 multiracial individuals (5%). Participants in the multiple ascending dose group were a mean (SD) age of 32 (15) years; 34 females (58%); 3 American Indian or Alaska Native (5%), 6 Black (10%), 47 White (80%), and 3 multiracial individuals (5%).

Among participants in the single ascending dose group, the baseline median Lp(a) levels were 10.3 mg/dL (IQR, 9.9-41.2 mg/dL) and the LDL cholesterol levels, 104.4 mg/dL (IQR, 81.2-123.7 mg/dL), and among the multiple-ascending group, the median Lp(a) levels were 58.3 mg/dL (IQR, 38.4-79.8 mg/dL), and the LDL cholesterol levels, 116.0 mg/dL (IQR, 100.5-127.6 mg/dL; eFigures 4 and 5 in Supplement 3 ). (To convert LDL cholesterol from mg/dL to mmol/L, multiply by 0.0259.) Medication usage during the study included 3 participants who were administered ibuprofen (2 participants took it once, 1 took it as needed for 2 days) and 3 participants who were administered COVID-19 vaccines. No participant was administered statin therapy.

Pharmacokinetic measurements for both parts of the study are presented in Table 2 . In the single ascending dose group, plasma muvalaplin levels were below the limit of quantitation (1.0 ng/mL) in the 1-mg dose cohort. Muvalaplin reached maximum observed plasma concentration between 2 and 5 hours after dosing, across the 10-mg to 800-mg dose range and exhibited a multiphasic decline thereafter ( Figure 3 , panel A). Elimination half-life ranged from 12.1 hours to 67.0 hours across the 30-mg to 800-mg dose range, increasing with dose. The maximum observed plasma concentration of muvalaplin and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 extrapolated to infinite time for muvalaplin increased with increasing single doses ( Table 2 ) but was not dose proportional (eTable 1 in Supplement 3 ).

In the multiple ascending dose group, the time of the maximum observed plasma concentration of muvalaplin occurred between 2 and 6 hours after dosing on day 1 and between 2 and 4 hours after dosing on day 14, across the 30-mg to 800-mg dose range, and exhibited a multiphasic decline thereafter ( Table 2 and Figure 2 , panels B and 2C). The elimination half-life of muvalaplin ranged from 70.9 to 414 hours and increased with doses from 30 mg to 500 mg. The muvalaplin maximum observed plasma concentration and AUC during a dosing interval also increased with dose after multiple dosing, and there was minimal accumulation between days 1 and 14. Analysis of increases in the maximum observed plasma concentration on days 1 and 14 and AUC during a dosing interval was not dose proportional (eTable 1 in Supplement 3 ).

Effects of muvalaplin administration on Lp(a) levels and other biomarkers are illustrated in Figure 3 and eFigures 2 and 3 in Supplement 3 . Reductions in Lp(a) levels from baseline were observed as early as day 2 with multiple dosing. The placebo-controlled reduction in Lp(a) was 63% to 65% at doses of 100 mg or more, occurring on days 14 and 15. Lp(a) levels returned to baseline by day 29 for the 30-mg dose, day 43 for the 100-mg dose, and day 64 for the 300-mg to 800-mg doses. Changes in levels of other parameters, including total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglyceride, and apo B 100 levels, were not significant for any dose of muvalaplin compared with placebo (eFigure 2 in Supplement 3 ). Modest correlations were observed between changes in Lp(a) and both apo B 100 and LDL cholesterol levels (eFigure 6 in Supplement 3 ).

Safety outcomes assessed during the studies are summarized in Table 3 and eTables 2 and 3 in Supplement 3 . Most adverse events associated with treatment were mild in severity, transient, and resolved without sequelae. There was no dose dependency for the frequency of participants reporting adverse events. No deaths or serious adverse events were reported. Four participants discontinued the study due to COVID-19 infection. In the single ascending dose group, 34 participants (62%) reported a total of 71 adverse events, the most common being headache (33%), back pain (13%), and fatigue (11%). Seven adverse events (headache, fatigue, and vomiting) were considered by the investigator to be related to study drug for 5 participants, 4 of whom received the 800-mg dose. The other participant received placebo. In the multiple ascending dose group, 47 participants (80%) reported a total of 175 adverse events, the most common being headache (31%), diarrhea (20%), abdominal pain (15%), nausea (10%), and fatigue (10%). One adverse event (acne) was considered by the investigator to be related to study drug. No discernible prolongation of the corrected QT interval was noted with any dose of muvalaplin. No hematological or hepatic biochemical adverse events were observed.

Given the close homology between apo(a) and plasminogen, 11 it is theoretically possible that lowering Lp(a) concentration may impact hemostatic parameters, and accordingly, additional analyses were performed to evaluate hemostasis-related biomarkers and plasminogen activity and levels in the multiple ascending dose study. Small reductions in plasminogen activity at the 2 highest doses (maximum reduction of approximately 14% with the 500-mg dose) were observed ( Figure 4 ). These differences were most evident on day 14 and returned to baseline after dosing cessation. No dose or time-dependent changes were observed in plasminogen concentration, plasminogen activator inhibitor 1, tissue plasminogen activity antigen or α 2 -antiplasmin (eFigure 3 in Supplement 3 ). No significant changes were observed in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels at day 14 (eFigure 3 in Supplement 3 ).

Muvalaplin is a small molecule that inhibits formation of Lp(a) by interfering with the binding of apo(a) to apo B 100 . This first-in-human, placebo-controlled, phase 1 study demonstrated that administration of muvalaplin for up to 14 days was not associated with tolerability concerns or any serious adverse events. Daily administration of muvalaplin produced dose-dependent lowering of Lp(a) by up to 65% by day 14 of daily dosing. Reduced Lp(a) levels, compared with baseline, persisted up to 50 days after the last muvalaplin dose. In those participants with elevated Lp(a) levels, treatment with muvalaplin at the highest dose resulted in 93% of participants with Lp(a) trough levels of 50 mg/dL or less at the end of the 14-day treatment period. Muvalaplin had no significant effects on other lipids in healthy participants with elevated Lp(a) levels.

Increasing epidemiological and genetic evidence suggests that Lp(a) has a causal role in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valve disease. Evaluation of 460 506 participants of the UK Biobank, with median follow-up of 11.2 years, demonstrated a linear relationship of Lp(a) concentrations with incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with a hazard ratio of 1.11 (95% CI, 1.10-1.12) per 50-nmol/L increment in Lp(a) concentration observed in the overall population. 14 Estimation of Lp(a) lowering needed to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events from the Copenhagen General Population Study suggests that lowering Lp(a) by 50 mg/dL within a 5-year period would potentially reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease events by 20% for secondary prevention. 15 This contrasts with estimates of potential need for greater Lp(a) lowering in analyses from the UK Biobank, which included a much broader range of individuals across the cardiovascular risk spectrum. 5

Recent developments of therapeutics that inhibit hepatic production of apo(a) through nucleic acid therapeutics have demonstrated effective Lp(a) lowering and good tolerability. 7 - 9 These agents are currently undergoing further evaluation in large clinical cardiovascular outcome trials, and they have the potential to transform the treatment of patients with high Lp(a) levels. However, the requirement for parenteral administration may present a potential barrier to widespread use. Muvalaplin is distinct, given both its once daily oral administration and mechanism of action that disrupts Lp(a) formation by blocking the initial noncovalent interaction between apo(a) and apo B 100 . Maximal dose-dependent reduction in Lp(a) concentration with muvalaplin was 65%, and the molecule was not associated with any serious adverse effects in this short-term study. The current study involved participants younger than those in the trials evaluating nucleic acid therapeutics, pelacarsen, and olpasiran. 8 , 9 Although muvalaplin lowers Lp(a) levels to a lesser degree than parenteral therapies currently in development, the extent of reduction required for clinical benefit has not been established and remains controversial. 16

Current treatment guidelines consider elevated Lp(a) levels as a risk-enhancing factor, supporting the need for intensification of lipid-lowering therapy. 17 The only established treatment option, apheresis, is reserved for those patients with severe Lp(a) elevations and is cumbersome. 18 , 19 Post hoc analyses of clinical trials of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors demonstrated that moderate reduction of Lp(a) levels was associated independently with a reduction in cardiovascular events. 20 , 21 The degree of Lp(a) lowering observed in these trials was modest (approximately 5 mg/dL, or 25%).

An additional area of importance involves the potential impact of muvalaplin on plasminogen activity. A high-percent sequence identity is shared between apo(a) and plasminogen, a factor involved in the fibrinolytic system. 11 Preclinical studies in rats demonstrated that multivalent molecules, similar to muvalaplin, bind to rat plasminogen kringle IV domains in vitro and cause reductions in plasminogen activity in vivo. However, species comparison of plasminogen primary protein sequences revealed a greater number of targeted interaction motifs in rat plasminogen compared with human plasminogen, suggesting the possibility of a lesser impact of muvalaplin on human plasminogen. In this study, minimal effects on plasminogen were observed with muvalaplin at the 500-mg dose (maximal 14% reduction in activity), with no dose effect noted, suggesting that this agent will not adversely affect fibrinolysis. The clinical consequences of such lowering of plasminogen levels in patients with high Lp(a) levels or with cardiovascular disease are unknown.

In developing Lp(a)-lowering therapies, the absence of standardized assays of Lp(a) levels remains an ongoing challenge. Variable reporting of Lp(a) levels according to mass or molar quantity and no standardization of conversion factors between the 2 limits direct comparisons between research studies. 22 The anti-apo(a) polyclonal antibody–based clinical immunoturbidometric assays to quantify Lp(a) levels have the potential to underestimate Lp(a) lowering during treatment with apo(a)-apo B 100 disrupters because these methods also likely measure apo(a) bound to muvalaplin in the circulation. Accordingly, the degree of true Lp(a) lowering with muvalaplin may be greater than observed with currently used assays.

Several limitations should be noted. First, this is a phase 1 study involving a small number of participants to establish an initial characterization of Lp(a) lowering and tolerability of muvalaplin during administration for 14 days. Establishing the safety profile of muvalaplin will require larger and longer clinical trials in more diverse populations, including patients with established cardiovascular disease. Second, the study included evaluation of the effect of muvalaplin in participants with both low and moderately elevated Lp(a) levels. However, this drug would likely be used in the clinical setting of participants with greater Lp(a) elevations. Third, the effect of muvalaplin on additional factors related to platelet activation in the setting of elevated Lp(a) levels has not been investigated. Fourth, it remains uncertain whether Lp(a) lowering with muvalaplin will reduce cardiovascular risk.

In summary, increasing evidence has implicated Lp(a) as a causal factor in both atherosclerosis and aortic stenosis. Accordingly, there is interest in developing effective approaches that will lower Lp(a) levels and reduce cardiovascular risk. Muvalaplin is the first oral agent specifically developed to lower levels of Lp(a) by disrupting its formation with once daily administration, introducing a different option for targeting Lp(a) in clinical development. These initial phase 1 clinical findings demonstrate that muvalaplin effectively lowers Lp(a) with no serious adverse effects.

Accepted for Publication: August 9, 2023.

Published Online: August 28, 2023. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.16503

Corresponding Author: Stephen J. Nicholls, MBBS, PhD, Victorian Heart Institute, Monash University, 631 Blackburn Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia ( [email protected] ).

Author Contributions: Drs Nicholls and Michael had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Drs Turner and Michael contributed equally to this article.

Concept and design: Ruotolo, Turner, Michael.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Nicholls, Nissen, Flemming, Urva, Suico, Berg, Linnebjerg, Turner, Michael.

Drafting of the manuscript: Nicholls, Turner, Michael.

Critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Nissen, Flemming, Urva, Suico, Berg, Linnebjerg, Ruotolo, Turner, Michael.

Statistical analysis: Berg, Turner.

Obtained funding: Michael.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Nicholls, Nissen, Urva.

Supervision: Nicholls, Michael.

Other - Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis: Turner.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Nicholls reported receiving grants from Esperion, AstraZeneca, New Amsterdam Pharma, Amgen, Anthera, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Novartis, Cerenis, The Medicines Company, Resverlogix, InfraReDx, Roche, Sanofi-Regeneron, and LipoScience; receiving honoraria to his institution from AstraZeneca, Amarin, Akcea, Eli Lilly, Anthera, Omthera, Merck, Takeda, Resverlogix, Sanofi-Regeneron, CSL Behring, Esperion, Boehringer Ingelheim, Vaxxinity, and Sequiris; and that he is a named inventor on a patent for PCSK9 inhibitors and atherosclerosis. Dr Nissen reported receiving grants to perform clinical trials from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Esperion Therapeutics Inc, Medtronic, MyoKardia, New Amsterdam Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Silence Therapeutics. Dr Urva reported being an employee and stockholder at Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Suico reported being an employee and stockholder at Eli Lilly and Company. Mr Berg reported being an employee and stockholder at Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Linnebjerg reported receiving support from, being an employee of, and holding owning stock in Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Ruotolo reported being an employee of and owning stock in Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Turner reported being an employee and stockholder at Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Micahel reported being an employee and stockholder at Eli Lilly and Company.

Funding/Support: This study was sponsored and funded by Eli Lilly and Company, manufacturer of muvalaplin. ProScribe–Envision Pharma Group provided administrative support to the authors.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: Eli Lilly and Company was involved in the study design, study management, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of the data, and preparation and review of the manuscript. The academic authors in collaboration with the sponsor contributed to data analysis and interpretation and made the decision to publish the manuscript and take responsibility for the completeness and accuracy of the data. The first author drafted the manuscript with input from all authors. The sponsor reviewed the manuscript and made suggestions, but the final decisions on content were performed by the academic authors.

Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 4 .

Meeting Presentation: This study was presented at the European Society of Cardiology Congress; August 28, 2023; Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Additional Contributions: We thank all study investigators and participants. We also thank Loredana Spoerri, PhD, of Proscribe–Envision Pharma Group, for their editorial support.

• Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
• Access PDFs of free articles
• Manage your interests
• Save searches and receive search alerts

By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies and similar tracking technologies described in our privacy policy .

Voice of the Discipline

News and publications.

Access AHA news and publications supporting the work of historians.

Stay up-to-date with the AHA

June 25, 2024

AHA Members Co-author Article on SCOTUS and Gun Control

AHA members Holly Brewer (Univ. of Maryland) and Laura F. Edwards (Princeton Univ.) have co-authored an article for Washington Monthly…

June 24, 2024

Action Alert Opposing Ohio SB 83

June 21, 2024

AHA Signs On to CIE Letter Urging HEA-Title VI Funding for FY 2025

June 18, 2024

Welcome to the AHA’s New Website

The American Historical Review is the flagship journal of the AHA and the journal of record for the historical discipline in the United States, bringing together scholarship from every major field of historical study.

Perspectives on History is the newsmagazine of the AHA and is the principal source for news and information about the discipline of history. Since 1962, Perspectives has promoted our work by publishing articles and commentary on all aspects of the historical discipline.

History in Focus Podcast

Environmental Crisis and Recovery

Collaborative history + revisiting marion thompson wright, aha booklets.

The AHA publishes booklets that address a diversity of topics to serve the needs of history students and historians in all professions. Our publications include career advice for history graduates, overviews and syntheses of current historical topics and fields, and guides to teaching and learning in history.

For the Press

The AHA is pleased to provide resources for journalists and press. If you are a member of the media and would like to submit a request for a referral or interview, please email [email protected] . Please provide any pertinent deadlines and we will do our best to accommodate your request. The AHA can find you a historian for any topic, and assists with dozens of inquiries each year.

The AHA encourages the reading of history with periodic reading challenges.

Permission to Use AHA Copyrighted Material

All material published by the American Historical Association in any medium is protected by copyright.

Join the AHA

The AHA brings together historians from all specializations and all work contexts, embracing the breadth and variety of activity in history today.