DISCUSSION From MSc dissertations to quantitative research papers in leading journals: A practical guide Gill Marshall a, *, Patrick Brennan b a School of Medical Imaging Sciences, St. Martin’s College, Lancaster, LA1 3JD, UK b UCD School of Medicine and Medical Sciences, Health Science Building, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland Received 12 September 2006; accepted 15 November 2006 Available online 2 January 2007 KEYWORDS Project; Thesis; Journal; Instructions to authors Abstract This article discusses the reasons for publishing dissertations produced for a taught MSc as quantitative research papers. Based on the authors’ personal experience and a review of the literature, insights are offered regarding why publication is important within radiography. The factors that encourage publication and the key questions that have to be addressed before writing are considered. Common pitfalls that prevent publication are tabulated. There is a dis- cussion regarding how the potentially daunting but worthwhile task of writing should be under- taken. The principles of reducing a dissertation to a quantitative paper suitable for publication are considered. It is concluded that much can be done to make the process of converting a dis- sertation to a quantitative paper more successful, provided that key questions are asked prior to writing. If there is a decision to proceed, a structured formulaic approach can be applied to re- ducing the dissertation which will be both ‘‘process’’ and ‘‘content’’ focused to a ‘‘content’’ focused quantitative paper. ª 2006 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Introduction In the authors’ experience many dissertations worthy of publication are not converted into papers that are submitted to scientific journals. This is despite best student intentions, entreaties from academic staff and external examiners and offers of guidance and support including co-authoring. This situation is mirrored in nursing and medicine where dissertations are ‘‘left to gather dust on library shelves’’ and are only read by examiners. 1e3 This non-publication is a missed opportunity to advance scien- tific knowledge and progress the academic/clinical career of the author(s). Often potential authors believe that their work is not worthy of publication and will only be rejected, however it is worth noting that for the journal Radiography, for the year to date (2006), that whilst 22% of papers are initially rejected but invited for a resubmission, only 4% were rejected outright. Also in one of the author’s host in- stitutions, papers developed from radiography undergradu- ate and postgraduate theses that have been submitted for * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ44 (0) 1524 384645/384566; fax: þ44 (0) 1524 384591. E-mail addresses: g.marshall@ucsm.ac.uk (G. Marshall), patrick.brennan@ucd.ie (P. Brennan). 1078-8174/$ - see front matter ª 2006 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.radi.2006.11.002 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/radi Radiography (2008) 14, 73e77