Transcript What Journal? - IFFS-UIT

How to Write a
Scientific Article
Nikolaos P. Polyzos M.D. PhD
The material was supported by an educational grant from Ferring
Well written papers are:
• Read
• Remembered
• Cited
Poorly written papers are not…
What Journal?
• Select a journal relevant to the work done
• Read ‘guidelines for authors’ on journal website
• Success depends on the ‘quality’ of the research
– Innovative
– Design of the study
– Size of the study
– Human or Animal
– Effect on clinical practice
Title
• Describes the contents of the paper
– As brief as possible
– Descriptive ‘Key words’
•
•
•
•
Molecular studies
Organism used
Treatment
Outcome measured
• Opinion paper - catchy title: ‘OHSS free clinic’
• Most readers find your paper via electronic
database searches
Authors
The Vancouver Criteria
Each and every author on a publication needs to
have been involved in the:
• Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of
data; AND
• Drafting the article or revising it critically for important
intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published
Why Has the Number of Authors Increase
With Years?
Average Number of Personal or Collective Author Names
Per MEDLINE/PubMed Citation
(when personal or collective author name present)
Collective Author Names
Personal Author Names
Average Number of Author Names
5.50
5.00
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
Year of Publication
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Abstract
Summarizes the major aspects
• Question(s) you investigated
– From introduction
• Experimental design
– From Material and Methods
• Major findings and key quantitative results
– From results
• Interpretation and conclusions
– From discussion
Abstract
Summarizes the major aspects
• All information in the abstract should appear in the
body of the paper
• No lengthy background information
• No references
• No abbreviations
• No figures, tables or references to them
Introduction
• Establish the context of the work reported
– Cite the primary research literature
Introduction
Most important part…
• Reviewers read in order to know why you did the
study, and whether it was worth doing . . .
CONVINCE THEM!
Introduction
• Establish the context of work reported
– Cite the primary research literature
and questions that remain unanswered
• State purpose of the work
– Hypothesis, question or problem
• Explain your rationale and approach
– Possible outcomes your study can reveal
Introduction
• Establish the context of work reported
– Cite the primary research literature
and questions that remain unanswered
• State purpose of the work
– Hypothesis, question or problem
• Explain your rationale and approach
– Possible outcomes your study can reveal
Material and Methods
• Protocol for collecting data
– How study was performed
•
How data were analyzed
– Statistics
Results
• Key results without interpretation:
concise and objective
• Use both text and illustrations
(figures, tables)
• Organize Results section based on the sequence
of Tables and Figures
Results
• Do not report individual raw data values when
they can be summarized as means, percents,
etc.
• Some information may be placed in
supplementary material (e.g., primers
for generating DNA sequencing)
Discussion
• Succinctly state your findings in the first
paragraph
• Always “connect” with the introduction
• Interpret your results in light of what was already
known
• Upright triangle
Discussion
Fundamental questions to answer:
• Do your results provide answers to your
hypothesis?
• Do your findings agree with what others have
shown?
• Given your conclusions: what is the new
understanding?
• What should be done next?
Discussion
• Stay focused on the research topic of
the paper
• Use paragraphs to separate each important point
• If findings did not support your hypothesis,
accept this and do not attempt to explain away
• Present your points in logical order
• Do not introduce new results
Discussion
• Comparable studies!
• Can systematic reviews and meta-analyses
always give you the best available evidence…..*-
EVEN WITH ZERO TRIALS?
Meta-analysis and Number of Trials Included
• 61 systematic reviews published in Cochrane
during July 2012
–
–
–
–
15% included 1 or 0 trials
Half included fewer than 1,000 randomized patients
31 were updated reviews
11 of these 31 updated reviews included the same
number of trials and participants as the previous
review they sought to bring up to date
Acknowledgments
• Assistance in thinking, designing, carrying out
work, providing medication
• Outside reviewers of the draft
• Obtain permission from those to be
acknowledged
• Sources of funding
• Conflicts of interest may be required
References
• List of cited articles
• Order/style: depends on the journal
• Software available (endnote, reference
manager,…)
Finally
• Self-revise your paper multiple times
– Enhance the logical flow of your arguments
– Shorten long sentences to clarify them
– Perform spelling check
– Revision by native English speaker
– Check the word count
•
(abstract, whole article…)
Finally
• Read your article many times before you submit
…. like it is not yours
• Try to find flaws — be the most critical reviewer
of yourself
Thank you