At the crossroads

Ephemeral history of the three-bladed tracheostomy dilator

Tracheostomy remains a topical surgical procedure. The history of tracheostomy is marked by the development of various instruments, including the three-bladed tracheostomy dilator from the middle of the 19th century. The purpose of this historical note is to recall the use of this unusual instrument.

Analysis of case reports submitted to the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Diseases

OBJECTIVES

To assess flaws, rejection rate and reasons for rejection of case reports submitted for publication in the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective analysis of flaws noted in reviewing 118 case reports from 29 countries consecutively submitted to the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Diseases during the period Sept. 1, 2014 to Sept. 30, 2015.

RESULTS

The most frequent flaws, noted in 74.5% of cases, were: lack of originality (more than 15 such cases previously reported in the medical literature) and lack of new data contributing to the medical literature. Overall, 5% of the cases were accepted for publication, 7% were not resubmitted by the authors, and 88% were rejected. On univariate analysis, none of the variables under analysis correlated with acceptance or rejection of the submitted case. Editorial decision time varied from 1 to 7months (median, 1 month). In 16.3% of the 104 cases of rejection (17/104), the editors suggested resubmission in the section "Letter to the Editor" or "What is your diagnosis?"; 15 of the 17 reports were resubmitted, and 10 (66.6%) were ultimately accepted for publication.

CONCLUSION

The editorial committee of the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Diseases hope that the present data and review of the literature will provide authors with a framework to avoid major errors leading to rejection and will speed publication of the case reports they submit to our columns in the near future.

Characteristics and analysis of scientific articles submitted to the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate characteristics, suggested modifications and reasons for rejection in scientific articles submitted for publication in the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective study analyzed the flaws noted by reviewers in 52 scientific articles submitted to the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases between August 31, 2014 and February 28, 2015.

RESULTS

Fifteen flaws concerning content and 7 concerning form were identified. In more than 25% of submissions, major flaws were noted: purely descriptive paper; lack of contribution to existing state of knowledge; failure to define a clear study objective and/or analyze the impact of major variables; poorly structured Materials and methods section, lacking description of study population, objective and/or variables; lack of or inappropriate statistical analysis; Introduction verbose and/or misrepresenting the literature; excessively heterogeneous and/or poorly described study population; imprecise discussion, straying from the point, overstating the significance of results and/or introducing new results not mentioned in the Results section; description of the study population placed in the Results section instead of under Materials and methods; serious mistakes of syntax, spelling and/or tense; and failure to follow the Instructions to Authors. After review, 21.1% of articles were published, 65.3% rejected and 13.4% non-resubmitted within 3 months of review. On univariate analysis, the only variable increasing the percentage of articles accepted was the topic not being devoted to head and neck surgery (P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

These results document the excessive flaw rate still to be found in manuscripts and demonstrate the continuing need for authors to master and implement the rules of scientific medical writing.