Scientific writing 2014

MANUSCRIPT
WRITING
Khaled Albazli
Manal Alotaibi
MBBS, Internal Medicine demonstrators

Outlines
 Introduction to scientific writing
 IMARD Format
 Manuscript writing
 Common editing mistakes

Why Scientific Writing?
 When a doctor decides to conduct a study, at
the same time the doctor should decide to
write and publish the study result as well.
 If you start to work but you will not finish it, why
do you start it?
 Moreover, if you finish the work but you will
not publish it, why do you finish it?
Michael Faraday,

Why Scientific Writing?
Writing and publishing a study result is important
either for the investigator or the reader.
 For the investigator or writer, publication is
evidence that he/she has conducted a clinical
trial according to good clinical practice.
 While for the reader, publication of a study
may
provide greater knowledge on research of
medical/health care science which may bring
advantages to enhance medical services for
patients.

 On the other hand, publishing a manuscript of
study
result in medical or biomedical journal is not as
easy
as we imagine.

Plan effectively
For original research:
 have a clear research question
 seek statistical advice
 use the right study design
 act ethically
 keep an open mind and minimise bias
 agree who will be principal investigator
 agree who will be authors and contributors
 agree to publish even negative results

WHAT DO THE READER AND
EDITOR WANT?
 Who will be the readers of my article?
 What will make the readers interested in
this article?
 What will be the main concern of the
readers?
 Do the readers understand the situation
and condition explained in this article?
 What does the writer expect after the
reader has done reading this article?

Top 10 Reasons Manuscripts
Rejected
1. Poor organization throughout, writing, spelling
2. Disorganized study design
3. Defective tables, figures
4. No hypothesis or problem statement
5. Inappropriate statistical methods
6. Over interpretation of results
7. No or insufficient conclusion
8. Poorly written abstract/title
9. Article unfocused
10. Wrong journal, format, preparation
Pierson DJ, Respiratory Care 49(10), 2004
Byrne DW, Publishing Medical Research Papers, Williams and Wilkins, 1998

Writing scientific manuscripts need not be
difficult or painful.
With a little bit of organization, discipline,
and persistence, writing manuscripts can
be learned rapidly, thus producing
excellent exchange of experience,
personal success, and scientific progress.

Clear writing
 Keep it simple: use short, familiar words
 Avoid jargon and acronyms
 Be specific
 Be concrete, not abstract
 Say what you mean and mean what you say

Writing is an Essential Skill
 The career of a researcher can depend
heavily on this skill
 The ability to communicate clearly and
precisely through the written word is an
essential skill for medical researchers

Try to Avoid
 Long complicated sentence
 Pretentious language
 Repetition
 Meaningless phrases
 Irrelevant material
 Cluttering a paragraph
 Citing too many references

Meaningless Phrases
 The results are given in Figure1, where it is shown that
temperature was directly proportional to metabolic
rate…
OR
 Temperature was directly proportional to metabolic rate
(Fig.1)..
 In order to determine... OR to determine… !!!!

Cluttering a Paragraph
 Don’t have more than one main idea or theme
in a paragraph? It is better in such cases to
rather write two or more linked paragraphs.
 Don’t overkill with too many citations. Just cite
the most important, most recent.
 (However, in a review paper it may be
appropriate to have an extensive/complete list
of references).

Before Starting to Write the
Paper
 Record your readings (results)
 Make tables
 Draw graphs
 Keep file to record summaries of results and
any observation however insignificant
 Date the files
 Revise your readings, you may need to
repeat an experiment while you still have the
materials.
 Write ideas when ever they come to you

IMRAD Format
 I = Introduction, what question (problem) was
studied
 M = Methods, how was the problem studied
 R = Results, what are the findings
 A = and
 D = Discussion, what do these findings mean

 Introduction
 Why was the study undertaken?
 What was the research question, the tested hypothesis or the purpose of the
research?
 Methods
 When, where, and how was the study done?
 What materials were used or who was included in the study groups (patients,
etc.)?
 Results
 What answer was found to the research question
 what did the study find?
 Was the tested hypothesis true?
 Discussion
 What might the answer infer and why does it matter?
 How does it fit in with what other researchers have found?
 What are the perspectives for future research?

Essential Parts of a Scientific paper
 Title: Describe concisely the core contents of the
paper
 Abstract: Summarize the major elements of the paper
 Introduction: provide context and rationale for the
study
 Materials: Describe the experimental design so it is
reproducible
 Methods: Describe the experimental procedures
 Results: Summarize the findings without interpretation
 Discussion: Interpret the findings of the study
 Summary: Summarize the findings
 Acknowledgement: Give credit to those who helped
you
 References: List all scientific papers, books and

Writing and Editing for Biomedical
Publication.
The first step: is always to read the Guide for Authors of the journal where you
intend to submit analysis (~1,000 words or less).
The second step: is to describe the results (~350 words).
 The methods and results are the most important parts of the paper. When
possible, use figures rather than tables to show your results.
 Start the manuscript preparation by describing the materials and methods,
including the planned statistical.
 The discussion typically starts with a short overview of the most important
results, followed by an assessment why the chosen design or model is
appropriate. The discussions should place the results into contact, and
present the clinical impact of the findings. The discussion should also
acknowledge limitations of the study. The final conclusions should be low-
key rather than exaggerated.
The last step: is writing the introduction (~350 words), the abstract, and the
title page.

The Title
 A good title is defined as the fewest possible
words that adequately describe the contents
of the paper.
 The title is extremely important and must be
chosen with great care as it will be read by
thousands, whereas few will read the entire
paper
 Indexing and abstracting of the paper depends
on the accuracy of the title. An improperly titled
paper will get lost and will never be read.

 Titles should neither be too short nor too long
as to be meaningless
 Waste words (studies on, investigations on, a,
an, the etc) should not be used.
 It should contain the keywords that reflect the
contents of the paper.
 It should be meaningful and not general
 It should be concise, specific and informative
 It should capture the fundamental nature of the
experiments and findings
The Title

Examples
1. Action of Antibiotics on Bacteria
 Action: should be defined
 Antibiotics: should be listed
 Bacteria: should be listed
2. Mechanism of Suppression of Non-
transmissible Pneumonia in Mice Induced by
Newcastle Disease Virus

How to Prepare the Title
 Make a list of the most important keywords
 Think of a title that contains these words
 The title could state the conclusion of the paper
 The title NEVER contains abbreviations,
chemical formulas
 Think, rethink of the title before submitting the
paper
 Be very careful of the grammatical errors due
to faulty word order
 Avoid the use of the word “using”

The Abstract
 An abstract can be defined as a summary of the
information in a document
 It is of fundamental importance that the abstract be written
clearly and simply, as it is the first and sometimes the only
part of the manuscript read.
 It should provide a brief summary of each of the main
sections (IMRAD) of the paper:
1. State the principal objective and scope of the investigation
2. Describe the methods used
3. Summarize the results, and
4. State the principal conclusions
 It is easier to write the abstract after completion of the
paper

Criteria of the Abstract
 It should not exceed 250 words
 It should be written in one paragraph.
 It should be written in the past tense as it refers to
work done.
 Long words should be followed by its abbreviation
which would be used through out the abstract and
paper.
 It should not cite any references (except in rare
cases)
 It should never give any information or conclusion
that is not stated in the paper

Introduction
 Brief and arresting
 Define nature and scope of problem, but
 Do not hide inconvenient facts
 Provide rationale for current study
 State aim of study

Introduction
 Adequate information to allow reader to
understand and evaluate present study without
referring to previous publications
 Key references to support background
information provided

Writing Rules for Introduction
 Use the present tense when referring to
work that has already been published, but
past tense when referring to your own
study.
 Use the active voice as much as possible
 Avoid lengthy or unfocused reviews of
previous research.
 Cite peer-reviewed scientific literature or
scholarly reviews. Avoid general reference
works such as textbooks.
 Define any specialized terms or
abbreviations

Methodology
The three questions
 What has been done?
 What did you look for?
 How was it done?

Methodology
 • Study design (drug trial / intervention;
prospective / retrospective; randomized, blinded;
sensitivity of method; questionnaire; case report;
guidelines; meta-analysis)
 • Setting
 • Who is the study about? – Participants and
control subjects (in animal studies, specify genus,
species)
 • What did you do?
– Intervention
– Follow up
 • What did you look for? – Outcome measure

Methodology
 • Inclusion criteria
 • Exclusion criteria
 • Sample size calculation
 • Circumstances under which intervention done
– Lab settings
– In-patient or real life
 • Consent
 • Ethics clearance
 Timing and duration of intervention
 • Equipment / kits / manufacturer
(Sections and subsections help)

Methodology
 • Define outcome
 • Parameters to assess outcome
 • Endpoint, cut-off values
 • Adverse events, if any

Results: General
 • What did you find?
 • Should answer all points raised in Methods
 • No new parameters
 • No mismatch in numbers between text and
tables / figures

Results: Participant
 • How many screened?
 • How many eligible?
 • How many recruited / excluded?
 • How many completed study?
 • Reasons for lack of completeness
 • Compliance with therapy / protocol

Results: Data presentation
 Cause of incomplete data, if any (sample lost,
incomplete study)
 • No repetition between text and tables
 • No interpretation
 • No adjectives (most, some, often..)
 • Provide value of p (“highly significant”, “very
highly significant” meaningless)

Tables and figures
 Tables are appropriate for large or complicated
data sets that would be difficult to explain clearly
in text.
 Figures are appropriate for data sets that exhibit
trends, patterns, or relationships that are best
conveyed visually.
 Any table or figure must be sufficiently described
by its title and caption or legend, to be
understandable without reading the main text of
the results section.
 Do not include both a table and a figure showing
the same information

Discussion
 • Discussion of major findings in light of
available data
 • Discussion of important minor findings
 • Alternative explanations
 • Strengths and limitations of study
 • Implications of findings
 • Unanswered questions and future research
 • Summary / conclusion

Common Mistakes in
Introduction
 • Details of previous studies
 • Abbreviations without full form
 • Details of Results and Conclusions

Common Mistakes in Methods and
Results
 Mixed up
 • Errors in data (e.g., mean age 25, range 17-
22)
 • Mismatch of data in Methods / Results /
Tables / Figures
 • Misinterpretation of data

Common Mistakes in
Discussion
 • Repeating results
 • Emphasizing strengths of study over its
weaknesses
 • Going beyond evidence and drawing
unjustified conclusions

Journal Editors Agree
 Good writing signals clear thinking and an
organized approach
 Clear direct English and logical, organized
writing are key to acceptance
 Even well-constructed study will be rejected if
the writing is flawed.

Manuscript Reviews
Receipt of
manuscript by
editorial asst
Manuscript
Editor
Title & Abstract
Headings
References
Tables/Figures
Read Through
Journal
Decision Editor
Revise-Acceptance ?
Revise-Accepted
Acceptance - Outright
Rejection - Outright
Editor Reports
Summary of peer reviews
Summary of editor’s review
Appropriate to
journal?
Conform to
guidelines?
No-DOA
Yes
Peer Reviewers
Masked review

Summary
 Outline your paper
 Start early as your data is being analyzed
 Look at your data and decide how to organize and present
your results: tables, figures, text
 Patterns and clues will emerge to guide your argument
 Start with results then introduction and discussion/conclusions
 Write title and abstract last
 Put it away, re-read, give to your colleagues to read
 Revise, revise, and re-revise
 Adhere to journal guidelines!
 Critically evaluate your paper with an editor’s eye
 Write clearly, logically, and simply!

Things may help you 
 http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/
 Plagiarism checker.
 Put the manuscript away for a couple of
days
 Let go of “academic” writing habits and
don’t imitate others’ writing. Develop your
own clear, direct style

References
 Fundamentals of good medical writing by Dr.Trish Groves, Deputy editor at BMJ
 How to write a scientific paper By Prof. Dr. Khadiga Gaafar, Zoology Dept., Faculty of
Science, Cairo
 University
 Writing The Biomedical Manuscript:A Systematic Approach. Christopher Dant. Stanford
Medical School.
 Writing for Scienti c Medical Manuscript: a Guide for Preparing Manuscript Submitted to
Biomedical Journals. Siti Setiati, Kuntjoro Harimurti Medicine, Faculty of Medicine,
University of Indonesia-dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta.
 A Step by Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Manuscript, Volker Wenzel, M.D., M.Sc.,
Martin W. Dünser, M.D.*, Karl H. Lindner, M.D.Department of Anesthesiology and Critical
Care Medicine, Innsbruck) Medical University, Innsbruck,Austria.

Scientific writing 2014

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Scientific writing 2014 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Scientific writing 2014