3 things my Handyman taught me about turning a manuscript rejection: important lessons for clinical researchers

Table of Contents

This week, I drew a crucial lesson from an unexpected source. It all started with my struggle with an unlikely opponent: my backyard sprinklers.

Crafting a manuscript can be daunting. Multiple components. A long, drawn-out process. So, it naturally hurts when we get a manuscript rejection from a journal. Oh, the dreaded email with “We regret to inform you that…”.

But after the initial disappointment settles, we need to soak in the comments and try to figure out what exactly did not work or resonate with the reviewers. Like fixing a malfunctioning sprinkler system, we need to first figure out where the problem lies.

Today, we will discuss how we can break down and conquer these challenges, aiming to help you get your manuscript accepted the next time.

Step 1: Identify and Acknowledge the Problem

I had been putting this off for a long time. I had somehow installed sprinklers with the help of the lords of YouTube. But the soil was so hard that I had not been able to bury them underground. They sat out there, teasing me for the past two years.

But recently, a bigger problem arose. The sprinkler system on the right side of the house stopped working. Like a true scientist, I repeatedly tried to diagnose the issue, ultimately giving up when no solution seemed viable.

That’s when the gentleman who mowed our lawn (who also happened to be a handyman) offered to help.

Step 2: Systematically Test and Analyze Each Component

When our lawn mower arrived, I had already ordered new sprinklers, thinking the old ones were beyond repair. Yet, he offered to investigate.

He meticulously tested each component:

  1. Check for Leaks: No leaks. I was relieved that I had done at least one thing right.
  2. Test the Timer: He unhooked the timer and joined the lines directly to the water hose. The timer was working fine.
  3. Inspect the Sprinkler Heads: He manually pulled out the heads, and when he did, they worked fine.

If everything was working fine, what could be the issue?

Step 3: Compare and Contrast with a Working System

My handyman took a moment to think again.

He then walked towards the other side of the house.

He looked at the water sprinklers on the left side of the house, which were working fine. But there was one difference that I had failed to notice. The sprinkler system on that side was shorter by two sprinklers. Could that have made the difference?

To test this, he blocked half of the sprinkler system on the right side (the non-working side), and voilà! We were back in action. The sprinklers were working again, full force.

After two years of contemplating and guessing, my sprinklers were finally working and underground. Oh, how happy they should be.

Sure, I got my sprinklers fixed. But more importantly, I learned—or rather relearned—a lesson that I had forgotten.

When something doesn’t work, isolate each part of the system and test them independently to see which are working and which are not.

Step 4: Applying the Lesson to Research

In research, we frequently run into similar complex issues, ones with many moving parts. So rather than getting overwhelmed, just isolate the problem into individual parts. You might just find what has held you back for years.

When your manuscript faces rejection, instead of blaming Reviewer 2, take a step back and assess:

  • Study design: Could it have been improved?
  • Research gap: Is it significant enough?
  • Framing: Do your results tell the story effectively?
  • Literature review: Is it thorough enough to support your arguments?

In Summary

We often face intricate problems in research and life. By isolating each component, we can identify the root cause and resolve long-standing issues. Remember: breaking down problems into manageable parts can lead to successful solutions.

When your manuscript gets rejected, treat it like a complex system. Break it down. Test each part in isolation. Fix the issues. This systematic approach can transform rejection into acceptance.

This Week’s Action Step

Reflect on a recent manuscript rejection. Break it down into components. Identify the subcomponent that caused the issue. Recognize it. Fix it. And you may just get your manuscript accepted into that journal you have been dreaming about.

That’s it for today. See you next week.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

Want Our Weekly Clinical Research & Manuscript Writing Insights?

Sign up for the RRA Weekly newsletter, where I share actionable clinical research and manuscript writing tips, advice, and insights, directly to your inbox every Friday.