Author Archives: Vekky Repi

Megajournals vs. Regular Journals: How to Choose Wisely

We cannot discuss megajournals without discussing open-access (OA) publishing. OA provides free access to published information with advantages such as no subscription fees, no paywall, and a wider audience. With the onset of OA, the megajournals, a category of OA journals, came into being. These are peer-reviewed journals; however, they might have less-stringent publishing criteria. Let us try to find out whether publishing in a megajournal is better or not.

What’s Best for You?

Whether to publish in a megajournal or a regular (traditional) journal is a personal choice. When making this decision, consider the following characteristics of megajournals:

Limited scope of peer review: In many cases, the scope of a peer review for a megajournal limits itself to the technical information presented. It might not assess whether the research is new or even important.
Broad range of subjects: Unlike traditional journals, megajournals accept and publish research articles from many disciplines. They do not specialize in a specific discipline or subject.
Article Processing Charges (APCs): APCs for publishing in megajournals are usually lower than those of traditional journals.
Turnaround time: They have quicker turnaround times between reviewers and researchers.

These are not necessarily negative characteristics. In fact, you might find them appealing because you might be able to publish sooner than expected. In addition, you will have a wider audience who will see your research, but be aware of some of the pitfalls. For example, PLOS ONE, touted as the first megajournal to be launched, has recently had some difficulties in keeping top management and in its declining impact factor.

Even so, several other journals have subscribed to this new model without experiencing any problems. Nature, Science, BMJ Open, Scientific Reports, and the Journal of the American Chemical Society, all highly reputed scientific journals, do not specialize in only one discipline.

Quick Check Before You Make the Choice

When considering publishing in a megajournal, keep in mind the following:

Check the publisher’s qualifications for any megajournal that you are considering. Some publishers overinflate their journal protocols to get your business or present themselves as “self-proclaimed” megajournals.
Check the profiles of the peer reviewers for the journal. Some peer reviewers hired by megajournals will review a variety of disciplines, some of which might not be in their field of study.
Assess the quality and reputation of the megajournal. Do your research on these publications. Make sure there are no previous issues involving internal affairs or articles published that suffered retraction later on. Some of the journals carry out such practice because the articles they published, contained falsified or fabricated data.

Where to Start

Your decision should be based on a concerted effort to review and assess the megajournals that you are considering. Even though you must always do your due diligence before submitting your research to a megajournal with which you might not be familiar, the experience can still be a positive one.

Recently, Enago Academy launched the Open Access Journal Finder (OAJF) that aims at enabling research scholars to find open access journals relevant to their manuscript. OAJF uses a validated journal index provided by Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) – the most trusted non-predatory open access journal directory in its search results. The tool displays vital journal details to the scholars including publisher details, peer review process, confidence index (indicates similarity between matching keywords in the published articles across all journals indexed by DOAJ), and publication speed.

Have you used a megajournal in your publishing endeavors? If so, please describe the peer review process, timing from submission to publication, quality of published research, and any other objective characteristics that you would like to pass on to our readers. Please let us know your thoughts in the comments section below.

Top 20 Tips for Presenting at International Conferences

Leave a reply

Presenting at international conferences is an integral aspect of scientific communication. It helps enhance researcher’s career prospects. Attending good conferences can be the best way of learning about new developments in a research field. However, for early-stage researchers, identifying the right conference, addressing larger audiences, and explaining their study in an effective and time-bound manner, can sometimes be daunting tasks. Moreover, with the increase in the number of predatory conferences, researchers should look for warning signs to distinguish between a predatory and a legitimate conference.

If researchers utilize this opportunity well, they can open doors to effective networking and future collaborations. Check out the handy checklist below to make your presentation experience at international conferences worthwhile!

Click on the image below to download the checklist

Top 10 Tips on Creating Images for Your Journal Manuscript

Leave a reply

In the process of academic research, the data obtained by researchers can only mean something when it gets published. Scientific images or figures are very useful to convey the research findings in a concise and visual manner. The process of creating an image or figure for a manuscript is often a very time-consuming step; for younger researchers, this can be very daunting. Because every academic journal has its own requirements, researchers need to abide by the same and follow them exactly.

In this infographic, we present some handy tips for you to refer to while creating images for your journal manuscript.

tips_journalmanuscript_final

How Paper Posters Evolved into Interactive Digital Presentations

Leave a reply

From Paper to Digital

Visual accompaniment to presentations is a time-honored way to enhance or add depth to the research results being shown to an audience. In the past, students or young researchers who presented academic and scientific work created paper posters that featured the highlights of their work. With the advent of technology, e-posters began to grow in popularity in the 1990s. Also known as “digital posters”, these come in a variety of formats. Some may include stand-alone single elements such as a video, chart, photo, game, slideshow, while some may include a combination of several videos, charts, etc.

E-posters, as their name implies, are hosted online rather than in physical space. Their integration into conference poster sessions has highlighted the advantages of digital over traditional paper posters, including:

E-posters may be interactive and facilitate learning without the presenter nearby
These posters can present a great deal of information in a condensed format. Unlike paper posters, they don’t look crowded and messy
Addition of video, voice, slideshows, and photos provides a more interactive and enhanced experience for the audience
E-posters widen the audience as they are available online to anyone, not only to conference attendees
As they are available online, digital posters also facilitate discussions or “communities of interest” around the presented work
E-poster sessions mitigate the busyness of live poster sessions, allowing participants to learn more from sessions they attend

With these numerous factors in favor of digital posters, it’s no wonder that they have become the norm over the past decade in many academic disciplines.

From E- or Digital Posters to Digital Interactive Poster Presentations

During the 14th Meeting of the European Association of Cardiothoracic Surgery in 2001, a new type of digital poster presentation was made, named digital interactive poster presentation. First proposed by De Simone et al. (2001), the digital interactive poster presentation, or DIPP, aimed to make poster sessions even more effective in communicating important data and discoveries by using an interactive format. The DIPP lets presenters project their posters on a screen or wall and give a brief, 3-5 minute presentation while highlighting important figures and charts. The popularity that the concept of DIPP had received at this very first session has grown ever since.

DIPPs are actually just soft copy or pdf versions of traditional posters that will be projected in the session followed. However, there are some advantages of DIPP over traditional posters. It allows the presenter to magnify or emphasize the portions of the presentation they find most interesting or relevant. It also provides opportunities for interaction between the presenters and audience in ways that traditional posters often do not. Traditional posters might end up in a trash can following a presentation. On the other hand, DIPPs can be preserved online, and later obtained in pen-drives if allowed.

Interactive Features of DIPPs

When a DIPP is created for viewing online or display on a screen or wall, the presenter can add different features to make it easier for the audience to interact more with the material and presentation. Hyperlinks and email addresses are one easy way to share contact information with interested audience members. For those of you who are more tech-savvy, you can include a QR code on your DIPP. That way, people who have a specific app installed on their smartphones or tablets can scan the QR code. It would direct them automatically to a website or receive contact information or text. Some people also include links that allow viewers to directly send their comments and feedback on the poster or presentation. With these new innovative presenting methods, scientific and scholarly community will be able to reach a much larger audience. This will, in turn, lead science and research to flourish.

Publisher Refrains from Charging Extra for Archived Papers

Leave a reply

The business of academic publishing is controversially inaccessible to its target audience; the academic community. Specifically, Elsevier and Taylor & Francis have been on the news regularly, due to disputes with universities in this regard. In recent disagreements, South Korean Universities cited the higher subscription rates that Elsevier charged. It also mentioned Elsevier’s misleading package deals of little-read journals. Meanwhile, librarians from UK/Irish institutions, and representatives of Research Libraries UK and beyond, urged Taylor & Francis to drop subscription charges. Overall, collaborative academic movements to improve accessibility to academic research journals could revolutionize the existing model of the publishing industry.

Flipping the Existing Business Model of Academic Publishing

Elsevier’s business model, at $1000/year to access one journal title, alongside annual fee increase of 5%, faces rising academic resistance. A German consortium, Projekt DEAL, repeatedly attempted to negotiate better pricing with Elsevier, for improved open access. This spurred boycotts and similar negotiations across universities in Finland, Peru, and Taiwan. In a similar move, the Finnish library consortium also led the #NoDealNoReview boycott. As a cumulative result, a consortium of South Korean Universities, reached a new deal with Elsevier to access its database ScienceDirect.

Following on from the South Korean Universities, the Finnish Consortium (FinElib) similarly joined Elsevier to outline a three-year agreement. The agreement would provide Finnish academic organizations access to Elsevier’s extensive research collection. The agreement further allows Finnish researchers to publish their articles at a discounted rate in Elsevier’s journals. These articles have open access to the researchers. The agreement termed the Science Direct Freedom Collection, collectively allow Finnish Universities subscription access to ~1,850 journals on Elsevier’s ScienceDirect. Universities intend to seek more concessions, in similar negotiations, in the future. In addition, existing pirate open-access platforms such as Sci-Hub have also added pressure to change the traditional publishing model.

Publishers Reverse the Decision on Additional Charges for Archived Materials

Meanwhile, in the UK, academics have forced Taylor & Francis to retreat from increasing charges for accessing archived journals. This decision was in effect after more than 110 universities signed a letter of protest. The publishers initially intended to introduce a “moving paywall” that included a 20-year span of papers, in the “front file”. Essentially, these publications would move forward with time, causing additional costs to access these papers as a separate package. Head librarians of the UK and Irish institutions opposed the new policy, as it would increase administration activities alongside substantial costs. The letter of protest alluded the move would create confusion and annoyance while diminishing archival coverage considered ‘opportunistic’.

Improving Partnerships in Academic Publishing

In response to the backlash, Taylor & Francis issued a statement that the new policy would not be implemented. Historic access was reinstated as part of the main subscription, alongside an apology for concerns generated by the new policy. Following the statement, library directors greeted the development and appreciated easy access to scholarly publications for University students and staff. Negotiations between Irish Universities and their next deal with Taylor & Francis are ongoing. Increasingly, the academic institutions are challenging academic publishers to implement a more accessible publishing model, while diminishing excess costs. Perhaps revolutionary change can be progressively achieved to replace the traditional academic publishing model after all.

What is the Difference between a Lead Author and Co-author?

Leave a reply

At first glance, the status of a “lead author” would seem to be fairly straightforward. If most of the work of a particular study is done by only one researcher then his name should come first in the citation. However, unless an agreement is reached among all authors defining what “the most work” means, misunderstandings will inevitably ensue and could lead to a conflict of interest. This situation can quickly deteriorate further to even academic misconduct if the list of authors doesn’t accurately reflect the extent of involvement for each author.

Definition of a “Lead Author” and “Co-Author”

The definition of a lead author and co-author are commonly considered as follows:

Lead Author: He/She is also called as the first author and is the one who carries out the research as well as writes and edits the manuscript.
Co-Author: He/She is the one who collaborates with the lead author and contributes to the work in the manuscript.

Assigning Authorship

One of the most significant issues in involving multiple authors in a research paper is the tendency to not be able to equally attribute each facet of the project to a specific researcher. For example, deference to seniority should not automatically equate to lead authorship status, but very often it does. The second assumption is that having a supervisor or senior author listed will improve both recognition and the chances of publication in a prestigious journal.

Related: Made a decision on the lead and co-author for your research paper? Check out this post for some orders and rules of authorship now!

At the other end, it is often assumed that junior researchers and staff members are grateful for the opportunity to be a part of the team and do not expect to be acknowledged as authors. As they often do much of the legwork for large projects, this assumption is highly disrespectful.

Establishing Boundaries

Operating on assumptions seriously undermines the importance of correct authorship status since such a designation carries with it academic, financial, and career implications. If the team has never worked together before and is committed to avoiding conflict over this issue, there are several good sources for general rules or codes of conduct that can be used to establish rules to which everyone can agree to comply. For example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) identifies four criteria that should be met to “qualify” for authorship status:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
Final approval of the work to be published
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Such rules may not help to resolve ego issues where individual team members expect recognition based on what they bring to the team, but by keeping the topic focused on workload and accountability; these rules carry the clear message that authorship is earned not granted.

Avoiding Conflict

No matter how many hierarchical ranks exist in your department, it is wise not to transfer the same bureaucratic headaches to your authorship team. There can be only one “lead author”, and the aim should be to recognize the remaining members as “co-authors” who agree, in advance, to what tasks they will each be responsible for. Any issues about the perceived fairness of such designations can then be addressed in advance rather than fighting over performance failure prior to publication.

Importance of Research Ethics

Leave a reply

There are multiple reasons why it is necessary to adhere to the basic norms of scientific conduct during academic research. The credibility of the scientific community and the perception of the public to judge and accept new results strongly depends on the authenticity of the results that have been published. It is particularly important to have a clear distinction between acceptable and unacceptable conduct especially when human beings or animals are involved in a study. Given the competitive nature of research, it has become increasingly challenging for scientists to report unique and pioneering research. Nevertheless, the practice of misreporting data and scientific results continues to be followed by some members of the research community.

Reality of Research Ethics

The most striking example of how research misconduct can destroy the lives of people is the case of Paolo Macchiarini, a surgeon who became famous for a supposed medical breakthrough that promised to revolutionize organ transplantation. The Italian scientist used synthetic scaffolds seeded with the patients’ stem cells to create trachea transplants. However, it turned out that his experiments on humans had no sound preclinical research foundation. At least seven of the nine patients that received the treatment died.

Related: Interested in learning more about unethical publishing practices? Check out this infographic on predatory publishing now!

Several investigations showed that Macchiarini manipulated some of the data in his scientific publications and reports, omitting or even fabricating results to make his treatments appear more successful. There has also been severe criticism in regards to the decision-making around all the operations. In the meantime, the scandal has led to Macchiarini’s dismissal and the resignation of several authorities from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden (Macchiarini’s former employer). Various papers co-authored by the Italian surgeon have also earned expressions of concern, including two highly cited articles published in Nature Communications and The Lancet.

Dos and Don’ts of Research Ethics

Do’s	Don’ts
Maintaining a good record of all your research activities and report your data as carefully and objectively as possible.	Fabrication, manipulation or misrepresentation of data.
Disclose financial or personal interests that may directly/indirectly affect your work.	Deceiving research sponsors, colleagues, or ethical committees by having bias in data interpretation, peer review, or personnel decisions.
Treat animals with care and respect when studying them in your research and adhere to ethical guidelines.	Use any external research data (published or unpublished) without permission.
Respect intellectual property, privacy, and confidentiality and give proper credit for any contributions from other researchers.	Support irresponsible publication practices. Your main goal should be to advance science and share your knowledge within the community.

Ethical Requirements

In general, analyzing non-adherence to ethical norms is extremely difficult, and in some cases, drawing a clear line between misconduct and misunderstanding is very difficult. Although researchers do recognize ethical norms, they are interpreted and applied in different ways at different institutes. Researchers usually are required to ensure conformance to ethical requirements during scientific research, including the proper design and implementation of studies that involve human or animal experiments, avoiding scientific misconduct (such as data fabrication or plagiarism), following environmental and safety regulations, adhering to norms related to authorship and intellectual property, and keeping confidentiality agreements.

Policies of Research Ethics

Ethics committees play an important role in defining the standards that need to be met for research ethics and ensuring that they are met. Some influential policies relating to research ethics include those introduced by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the American Chemical Society, or the European Network of Research Ethics Committees. Other guidelines such as the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki have been fundamental in defining human research ethics.

Despite recent scandals, including the cases of Paolo Macchiarini, Scott Reuben or Olivier Voinnet, the awareness about research ethics seems to be increasing in the scientific community. Several resources covering the most important aspects in this area are available and many academic institutions are now introducing educational curriculums to help researchers resolve ethical dilemmas.

Importance of Ethics Committees in Scholarly Research

Leave a reply

Ethics committees review research proposals involving human participants and their data to ensure that they agree with local and international ethical guidelines. They also monitor studies once they begin and—if necessary—may take part in follow-up actions after the end of the research. Their main responsibility is to protect the subjects involved in the study and also consider the possible risks to the community and the environment. Ethics committees have the authority to approve, reject, modify, or stop studies that do not conform to the accepted standards.

Role of Ethics Committees

Most journals do not publish any results unless they have been approved by an ethics committee and they may withdraw published articles that exhibit any ethical problems. Recently, a study published in the journal Disability and Society was retracted after the human research ethics committee at the University of Waikato in New Zealand expressed concerns over the publishing methods used in the study.

The paper described the case of a girl who was born with a brain injury and was treated with hormones to keep her small, making it easier for her parents to take care of her. The procedure—known as the Ashley treatment—is rather controversial but seems to be on the rise. Although the Disability and Society study only analyzed a particular case (without actually involving any clinical subjects), the report was apparently inaccurate. The girl’s family finally decided to file a complaint against it.

In a similar case, the European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery retracted another manuscript about a heart surgery technique after discovering that the researchers did not have ethics approval to perform the procedure on 130 patients. It turned out that the Iranian Cardiac Surgical Society had already asked the authors to stop using the method back in 2004, six years before the study was complete. In the retraction notice, the editor-in-chief also advised other surgeons to refrain from using this technique.

Greater Transparency in Ethics Committees

It is clear that poor regulation can cause severe harm to patients, as demonstrated in the case of Paolo Macchiarini, where a series of irregularities surrounding his recruitment and research activities at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm served as a platform for his unacceptable behavior. Thus, independent and reliable committees are essential to ensure high ethical standards in the scientific community.

In a study published recently in the British Medical Journal, a group of scientists have called for more transparency in the processes followed by the ethics committee. According to the researchers, any documentation related to the ethical approval of clinical trials should be freely available, allowing ethical decisions to be publicly reviewed and discussed. They believe that this could help researchers to minimize participant harms and maintain public trust.

Members of an Ethics Committee

Most research ethics committees include both individuals with scientific or medical expertise and non-scientists. The reason is that some risks, particularly those related to social, legal, or cultural considerations, may be more easily identified by non-scientific members, whereas the procedures and scientific validity of the study design must be evaluated by experts in the field. Ideally, gender balance and social diversity should also be reflected in the committee’s composition. Moreover, the membership should be designed in such a way as to minimize conflicts of interest in the decision-making process.

Good Team Work is Essential

There are several situations where researchers and ethics committees must work together. These include

Identifying and weighing up the risks and benefits of a study (considering human subjects, animals, the community, and the environment).
Recognizing any financial or personal interests that may affect the research.
Evaluating the recruitment process and any incentives that will be given to the participants.
Assessing the procedures and methods used to ask for participants’ informed consent.
Ensuring that all the research activities are recorded properly and reported in a responsible, honest, and objective way.
Guaranteeing fairness, confidentiality, and privacy for all the subjects involved in the study—or at least full transparency about data-sharing in cases where absolute confidentiality is not possible.

If the research also includes medical interventions, scientists and ethics committees must make sure that adequate care and treatment will be provided.

How Do Online Manuscript Submission Systems Work?

Leave a reply

Many publishers now use electronic manuscript submission and peer-review systems to manage their publications and it is important for authors to get familiar with these as it could save them valuable time and help them communicate better with editors and referees.

Most of the programs available work in a similar way—be it ScholarOne, used by SAGE and some of the journals published by the Nature Publishing Group, Editorial Manager, used by Springer, Wiley, or PLOS, or Elsevier’s new Evise®. All these systems have been designed to make the publishing process more efficient and readily accessible to authors and reviewers from all over the world.

Fast, Easy, and Convenient

There are many advantages associated with online submission systems. In general, they ensure a more rapid and convenient publication while saving authors, editors, and publishers time and money. Authors can submit their manuscripts electronically at any time and from any part of the world. Similarly, suitable referees can be contacted easily by e-mail. Access to the system (for both authors and referees) is controlled by login and user privileges. The electronically conducted peer-review process allows for faster and easier communication between authors and referees.

Role of Editors in Security of the System

However, recent issues, such as the discovery of peer-review rings, have exposed some weaknesses in modern publishing systems. In several cases, unethical scholars have exploited features of the automated process to cheat editors into accepting manuscripts, often by doing their own reviews. In the end, it is the responsibility of the journals and their editorial teams to invite suitable referees for their papers. If the selection process is done in a proper way, by carefully checking the e-mail addresses, affiliations, and expertise of potential reviewers, such problems can be minimized.

In the past, other issues including poor password management and lax password protection were also discussed. In 2012, an Elsevier journal retracted several papers after an unknown person accessed an editor’s account and assigned the manuscripts to fake peer reviewers. Fortunately, many of these security problems have been corrected and the benefits of electronic manuscript submission systems now overweigh the drawbacks.

Six Simple Steps to Online Submission

The online submission process is usually quite straightforward—and the software provided by most publishers is self-explanatory—so submitting a paper to a journal only requires a few simple steps:

Preparing your manuscript: To start with, make sure that your paper is ready for submission. Most journals have specific formatting and length requirements, so check the author guidelines on the publisher’s site for more information. Some journals even have templates for the different types of publications, which you can download.
Registration and/or login: The first time you use an online system, you must register for an account. You will need your login information each time you return to the site.
Entering manuscript information: When submitting your paper, you must provide some basic information, such as title, authors, affiliations, abstract, cover letter, suggested and/or opposed reviewers (in some cases), conflicts of interest, keywords, etc. At this stage, you must also inform the editor of any related manuscripts submitted or in press at other journals.
Uploading your manuscript to the system: Now it is time to upload the text and figure files of your paper. The manuscript will normally be converted to PDF for your review and approval.
Providing additional information: Normally, you can also upload supporting information (images, movie files, or text) to the journal’s database. In most cases, you will also be prompted to submit a completed copyright form provided by the publisher.
Reviewing and submitting your paper: Finally, you must carefully review the converted PDF file to make sure that all the equations, tables, and special characters are shown properly. Once approved and submitted, the converted file will be viewed by editors and referees.

Writing a Cover Letter for Journal Submission

Leave a reply

One of the most neglected aspects of journal submission is the cover letter. Although it may seem like a formality, the cover letter is actually an important part of the submission process. The cover letter is your chance to tell the editor about your manuscript, why it is important, and how it fits into the scope of their journal. Overall, the letter should grab the editor’s attention. This letter should not be written hurriedly, because the quality of the cover letter can make or break your chances of publication. The cover letter should follow a fairly standard format.

Format of a Cover Letter

The first thing you need to do is check your target journal’s author instructions for the cover letter requirements. Sometimes, the journals will request that certain phrases or statements be included in the cover letter. If this is the case, then make sure that your letter contains all of the required information and statements mentioned in the instructions. Before writing the letter, here are a few key things to remember with regard to the format of the letter.

The letter should be written on a letterhead, and it should be limited to about one or one and a half pages long. All the proper letter heading materials should be included (the date and the address of the recipient should be at the top left, under the letterhead).
It should address the editor by name, if this is known.
The body of the letter should include four short paragraphs.
The first paragraph should introduce the author while stating that the author is submitting a manuscript for review. This section should include the title of the manuscript and the journal name.
The second paragraph should cover the focus of the manuscript. This should include about 4-5 sentences that describe the focus of the study, the hypothesis, the approach, and the methodology.
The third paragraph should be about 2-3 sentences and should describe the key findings and how these contribute to the field. It should also describe the scope of the manuscript to the journal based on the details of the manuscript. If you have any other important details that might make your manuscript stand out and encourage the editor to send it for review then do not forget to mention those details in this paragraph.
The final paragraph should always thank the editor for considering the manuscript for publication.

Points to Remember

In addition, there are certain key phrases that need to be included, and some of these are even required by most journals. It should be mentioned that the written manuscript is original and no part of it has been published before, nor is any part of it under consideration for publication at any another journal. The authors might also need to declare any conflicts of interest.

Related: Drafting your cover letter for manuscript submission? Check out this post now for additional points to consider submitting your manuscript!

Finally, some journals require that you submit a list of potential reviewers in the cover letter and also allow you to mention any researchers who should not review your manuscript. All of these added statements are a very important part of the cover letter, especially if they are required by the journal, and contribute to the editors overall view of your manuscript submission. Do not forget to proofread your cover letter several times. The text should be revised for clarity and succinctness. Points or sentences that stray from the focus should be removed and all the sentences should be directly related to the purpose, the main results, and the most important findings and conclusions.

In addition, all basic grammar and construction issues should be corrected during the revision. If you need help with the revision, you can include your cover letter with your manuscript when seeking for a professional proofreading service. If you are still unsure of where to start with your cover letter, there several templates available that can help. We have listed some of these below:

https://spie.org/Documents/Publications/Journals/sample_cover_letter.doc

www.springer.com/cda/content/document/…/JGIM+Cover+letter+templates.doc