PEDIATRICS Vol. 98 No. 2 August 1996, pp. 177
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content

AUTHOR!

[The author of a research articlel]. . .feels that his/her paper is a great masterpiece written in deathless prose for consumption by the masses. His or her ego is on the line when the precious opus is dropped in the mail for the cruel scrutiny of the review system. Most authors would be satisfied only with a telegram from the editor the next day, telling them that their paper is so important that it will be published immediately, without review, in a special issue of the journal with their picture on the cover. As the days tick by without reply their apprehension grows. Has their paper been sent to their arch rival? Will their own simplicity be apparent, or has it been well-concealed by the usual practice of beginning with the general case, and explaining only special examples (the places they actually started) as afterthoughts treated as of no importance to the potential reader? The euphoria attached to the initial generation of the paper dims, to be replaced with a latent anger ready to be fired at hostile reviewers...