- Email: [email protected]
What Makes a Physics Article Appealing to a Clinical Audience?
International Journal of
Radiation Oncology biology
physics
www.redjournal.org
EDITORIAL
What Makes a Physics Article Appealing to a Clinical Audience? Jonas D. Fontenot, PhD,*,y Kristy K. Brock, PhD,z and Eric E. Klein, PhDx *Department of Physics, Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, and yDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; zDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and x Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri Received Sep 9, 2014. Accepted for publication Sep 11, 2014.
The Red Journal physics section receives the highest volume of manuscript submissions of all the specialty sections of the Journal. During the past 12 months, the physics section has handled more than 300 submissions for consideration of publication, indicating a high level of academic activity among the medical physics community. In addition, physics manuscripts also have the distinction of having perhaps the largest variation in content type across the journal sections, ranging from basic discovery to developmental to clinical applications, and everywhere in between. As the official journal of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the Red Journal is tasked with providing its readership with high-impact reports of laboratory and clinical investigations. Taking ASTRO membership as a surrogate for Journal readership, one may estimate that radiation oncologists outnumber medical physicists as consumers of content by a ratio of about 3 to 1. In serving the needs of the readership, it is logical then that the primary focus of the Journal is to publish content with physicians’ interests in mind. Given the large number of manuscript submissions and the limited print space, the Journal must therefore be very selective with its published content, with a natural weighting toward clinical or applied topics. Given these observations, it is not surprising that two thirds of submissions received by the physics section are either rejected or declined. Unfortunately, this inevitably Reprint requests to: Jonas D. Fontenot, PhD, Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70809. Tel: (225) 215-1337; E-mail: jfontenot@ marybird.com Int J Radiation Oncol Biol Phys, Vol. 91, No. 1, pp. 20e21, 2015 0360-3016/$ - see front matter Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.09.017
includes manuscripts that are well written, scientifically rigorous, and intellectually stimulating, but not necessarily well suited in subject matter or content type for the general readership of the Journal. Within the broad spectrum of active medical physics investigation, what then are the features or characteristics of a manuscript that will constitute a strong article for a clinical audience or that will constitute a strong translational physics article? Below is a list of some of the features (and a recent example reference of each) that make a manuscript particularly appealing to the general Red Journal readership: Novel in concept: holds the potential to shift a clinical paradigm (1) Novel in application: demonstrates the use of an existing technique or technology for a new purpose (2) Transferable: describes a concept, idea, or application that can rapidly be deployed into one’s own clinical practice (3) Translational: reports the application to a clinical population of a concept or technique previously demonstrated only in research studies (4) Wide perspective: describes a technique or concept with the potential to demonstrably improve quality of care (5) Comprehensive validation: expands on a proof-ofconcept study to provide statistically sound evidence of advancement (6) Provides support for evidence-based medicine (7) Conflict of interest: none.
Volume 91 Number 1 2015
The above list is neither exhaustive nor prescriptive. The Journal certainly encourages the submission of strong physics manuscripts from all areas of active investigation pertinent to radiation oncology. However, the list does show one or more traits contained by many submitted physics manuscripts that have been published in the Journal and that are likely to improve the probability of acceptance for future manuscripts.
References 1. Jarvis LA, Zhang R, Gladstone DJ, et al. Cherenkov video imaging allows for visualization of radiation therapy in real time. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;89:615-622. 2. Kang J, Huang J, Gailloud P, et al. Planning evaluation of C-arm cone beam CT angiography for target delineation in stereotactic radiation surgery of brain arteriovenous malformations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;90:430-437.
Physics articles
21
3. Stroom J, Gilhuijs K, Vieira S, et al. Combined recipe for clinical target volume and planning target volume margins. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;88:708-714. 4. Voet PW, Dirkx ML, Breedveld S, et al. Fully automated volumetric modulated arc therapy plan generation for prostate cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;88:1175-1179. 5. Brink C, Bernchou U, Bertelsen A, et al. Locoregional control of nonsmall cell lung cancer in relation to automated early assessment of tumor regression on cone beam computed tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;89:916-923. 6. Zhu M, Bzdusek K, Brink C, et al. Multi-institutional quantitative evaluation and clinical validation of Smart Probabilistic Image Contouring Engine (SPICE) autosegmentation of target structures and normal tissues on computer tomography images in the head and neck, thorax, liver, and male pelvis areas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013;87:809-816. 7. Diot Q, Marks LB, Bentzen SM, et al. Comparison of radiationinduced normal lung tissue density changes for patients from multiple institutions receiving conventional or hypofractionated treatments. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;89:626-632.
Radiation Oncology biology
physics
www.redjournal.org
EDITORIAL
What Makes a Physics Article Appealing to a Clinical Audience? Jonas D. Fontenot, PhD,*,y Kristy K. Brock, PhD,z and Eric E. Klein, PhDx *Department of Physics, Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, and yDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; zDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and x Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri Received Sep 9, 2014. Accepted for publication Sep 11, 2014.
The Red Journal physics section receives the highest volume of manuscript submissions of all the specialty sections of the Journal. During the past 12 months, the physics section has handled more than 300 submissions for consideration of publication, indicating a high level of academic activity among the medical physics community. In addition, physics manuscripts also have the distinction of having perhaps the largest variation in content type across the journal sections, ranging from basic discovery to developmental to clinical applications, and everywhere in between. As the official journal of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), the Red Journal is tasked with providing its readership with high-impact reports of laboratory and clinical investigations. Taking ASTRO membership as a surrogate for Journal readership, one may estimate that radiation oncologists outnumber medical physicists as consumers of content by a ratio of about 3 to 1. In serving the needs of the readership, it is logical then that the primary focus of the Journal is to publish content with physicians’ interests in mind. Given the large number of manuscript submissions and the limited print space, the Journal must therefore be very selective with its published content, with a natural weighting toward clinical or applied topics. Given these observations, it is not surprising that two thirds of submissions received by the physics section are either rejected or declined. Unfortunately, this inevitably Reprint requests to: Jonas D. Fontenot, PhD, Mary Bird Perkins Cancer Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70809. Tel: (225) 215-1337; E-mail: jfontenot@ marybird.com Int J Radiation Oncol Biol Phys, Vol. 91, No. 1, pp. 20e21, 2015 0360-3016/$ - see front matter Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.09.017
includes manuscripts that are well written, scientifically rigorous, and intellectually stimulating, but not necessarily well suited in subject matter or content type for the general readership of the Journal. Within the broad spectrum of active medical physics investigation, what then are the features or characteristics of a manuscript that will constitute a strong article for a clinical audience or that will constitute a strong translational physics article? Below is a list of some of the features (and a recent example reference of each) that make a manuscript particularly appealing to the general Red Journal readership: Novel in concept: holds the potential to shift a clinical paradigm (1) Novel in application: demonstrates the use of an existing technique or technology for a new purpose (2) Transferable: describes a concept, idea, or application that can rapidly be deployed into one’s own clinical practice (3) Translational: reports the application to a clinical population of a concept or technique previously demonstrated only in research studies (4) Wide perspective: describes a technique or concept with the potential to demonstrably improve quality of care (5) Comprehensive validation: expands on a proof-ofconcept study to provide statistically sound evidence of advancement (6) Provides support for evidence-based medicine (7) Conflict of interest: none.
Volume 91 Number 1 2015
The above list is neither exhaustive nor prescriptive. The Journal certainly encourages the submission of strong physics manuscripts from all areas of active investigation pertinent to radiation oncology. However, the list does show one or more traits contained by many submitted physics manuscripts that have been published in the Journal and that are likely to improve the probability of acceptance for future manuscripts.
References 1. Jarvis LA, Zhang R, Gladstone DJ, et al. Cherenkov video imaging allows for visualization of radiation therapy in real time. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;89:615-622. 2. Kang J, Huang J, Gailloud P, et al. Planning evaluation of C-arm cone beam CT angiography for target delineation in stereotactic radiation surgery of brain arteriovenous malformations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;90:430-437.
Physics articles
21
3. Stroom J, Gilhuijs K, Vieira S, et al. Combined recipe for clinical target volume and planning target volume margins. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;88:708-714. 4. Voet PW, Dirkx ML, Breedveld S, et al. Fully automated volumetric modulated arc therapy plan generation for prostate cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;88:1175-1179. 5. Brink C, Bernchou U, Bertelsen A, et al. Locoregional control of nonsmall cell lung cancer in relation to automated early assessment of tumor regression on cone beam computed tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;89:916-923. 6. Zhu M, Bzdusek K, Brink C, et al. Multi-institutional quantitative evaluation and clinical validation of Smart Probabilistic Image Contouring Engine (SPICE) autosegmentation of target structures and normal tissues on computer tomography images in the head and neck, thorax, liver, and male pelvis areas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2013;87:809-816. 7. Diot Q, Marks LB, Bentzen SM, et al. Comparison of radiationinduced normal lung tissue density changes for patients from multiple institutions receiving conventional or hypofractionated treatments. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;89:626-632.