Quality Visuals Matter More Than Quantity in Scientific Manuscripts, Survey Shows
UK: A new study has highlighted the significant role that figures and schematics play in shaping reviewers' perceptions and influencing manuscript acceptance in medical imaging journals. The findings suggest that while well-designed visual elements can improve how research is understood and evaluated, the overall quality and clarity of figures are more important than simply increasing their number.
The study was published in Apollo Medicine by Rajesh Botchu from the Department of Musculoskeletal Radiology at the Royal Orthopedic Hospital, Birmingham, UK, along with colleagues.
The researchers conducted a cross-sectional survey involving 105 clinicians who serve as editors and peer reviewers for medical imaging journals. Most participants belonged to the specialties of orthopaedics and radiology. The survey explored reviewers’ opinions regarding the importance of figures, preferred types of visual content, the influence of schematics on review decisions, and the perceived value of graphical abstracts and detailed figure legends.
The survey revealed the following findings:
- A large majority of reviewers (91.7%) considered the inclusion of figures highly important when evaluating scientific manuscripts.
- Original images were the most preferred visual format among reviewers (85.7%).
- Schematics were also valued (60.5%) as they help simplify complex findings and improve clarity.
- The combination of original images and schematics was perceived to increase the likelihood of manuscript acceptance, with 57.1% of reviewers supporting this view.
- Increasing the number of figures alone did not necessarily improve reviewer favorability.
- About 25.6% of respondents disagreed with the notion that more figures automatically lead to better reviewer ratings.
- Opinions regarding graphical abstracts were mixed, with 40% supporting their inclusion and 32.3% expressing reservations.
- Reviewers emphasized that concise and informative figure legends are essential for the proper interpretation of visual data.
Sharing his perspective with Medical Dialogues, Dr. Botchu explained that the motivation for conducting the study stemmed from his experience as a prolific clinical researcher and author. “I am a clinical researcher who has published over 400 papers and 87 chapters, and edited six books. I believe figures and schematics are crucial for any article, particularly in radiology and orthopaedics, as they demonstrate findings in a simpler way for readers,” he said.
He further noted that reviewers often favor original images and schematics because they help communicate key findings more clearly than text alone. “Original images and schematics are easier to understand and increase the value of a paper,” he added.
According to Dr. Botchu, the key message for authors is not to focus on the quantity of figures but rather their quality and relevance. High-quality images and schematics that clearly demonstrate important results can significantly enhance the impact of a manuscript.
The authors conclude that visual elements remain an essential component of scientific communication in imaging-related fields. They encourage researchers to incorporate clear and meaningful figures, schematics, and graphical summaries wherever possible to effectively present their findings and improve the chances of manuscript acceptance.
Reference:
Ajmera, P., Shirodkar, K., Vaishya, R., Jain, V. K., Iyengar, K. P., & Botchu, R. The Impact of Figures and Schematics on Reviewer Ratings and Manuscript Acceptance: A Cross-sectional Survey. Apollo Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1177/09760016251324320
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.