MANUSCRIPT WRITINGKhaled AlbazliManal 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 importanteither 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 mayprovide 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 easyas 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

Avoi

dabl

e

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

websites that you cited

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 used3. 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

EditorTitle & 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

- D

OA

Yes

Peer ReviewersMasked 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 Scientic 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.