Why write a paper? You would have started with an idea, developed a hypothesis, designed a study, and conducted your study to prove or disprove your hypothesis. Now you need to disseminate the results. \u2018If it is not published it never happened\u2019.<\/p>\n
This post may help you get organised to write your paper. A pdf can be downloaded:\u00a0How to write a paper<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n To get started, you should:<\/p>\n Before you start, assemble and READ the following documents:<\/p>\n Resources for writing your paper include your original study protocol, your approved application for ethics approval if relevant. These documents will contain much of the information you need. If these are well written all that might remain is for you to fill in the results and write your discussion! These steps can be envisioned as a cycle.<\/p>\n The final step is to submit your manuscript to the journal of your choice.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Your manuscript will include a title page, abstract, body of the manuscript, references and acknowledgements. The recommendations from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors are particularly useful when embarking on writing your paper: http:\/\/www.icmje.org\/recommendations\/browse\/manuscript-preparation\/preparing-for-submission.html#d<\/p>\n For example, the following publications give a good sense of what the manuscript is about:<\/p>\n The medical management of missed miscarriage: outcomes from a prospective, single-centre, Australian cohort. Petersen SG, Perkins AR, Gibbons KS, Bertolone JI, Mahomed K. Med J Aust. 2013 Sep 2;199(5):341-6.<\/p>\n Serum vitamin D levels are lower in Australian children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes than in children without diabetes. Greer RM, Portelli SL, Hung BS, Cleghorn GJ, McMahon SK, Batch JA, Conwell LS. Pediatr Diabetes. 2013 Feb;14(1):31-41<\/p>\n Decide on the authors and order of authors BEFORE you begin any research study. This prevents misunderstandings and possibly arguments later. In the biomedical sciences, the person who did research and wrote the paper is conventionally the first author, the head or leader of the research group is last, and everyone else goes from first to middle or last to middle in decreasing order of importance\/contribution.<\/p>\n Authorship must be justified. Authors must have contributed intellectually and substantially to the research and the manuscript. People who helped but did not contribute intellectually, for example technical people, may be included in \u2018acknowledgements\u2019 at the end of the paper<\/p>\n Use both or all initials of authors, to facilitate electronic searching. Make sure you have the correct qualifications, affiliation\/s, and email address for each author.<\/p>\n The abstract should follow the IMRAD format, as for the main body of the text. Features of the abstract:<\/p>\n The body of the manuscript should be structured around the IMRAD format:<\/p>\n I\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Introduction<\/p>\n M\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Methods<\/p>\n R\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Results<\/p>\n A\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 and<\/p>\n D\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Discussion and Conclusions<\/p>\n The introduction should be short, usually just a few paragraphs. Avoid a detailed discussion of the literature \u2013 this comes in the discussion section. You only need to convey the following points which should be addressed:<\/p>\n Be specific when citing previous work \u2013readers find it helpful if you specify the author\/s, subject numbers, year of publication and effect size. For example<\/p>\n \u2018Smith et al, in their 1965 study of 2000 mice, found that black mice had on average 20% (95% confidence interval 18-22%) higher problem solving ability than white mice\u2019<\/em>\u2026..gives more complete information than \u2018a study found that different coloured mice had different problem solving ability\u2019…<\/em>.<\/p>\n The AIMS of the study are described at the end of the introduction, as well as specific hypotheses to be statistically tested.<\/p>\n The purpose of the \u2018methods\u2019 section in your manuscript is to enable the reader to understand what you have done, and to be able to reproduce your results.<\/p>\n The various standards of reporting are invaluable guides to structuring your methods section. Each standard, guideline or checklist has a list of items which should be addressed in the methods section.<\/p>\n The following standards are commonly applicable:<\/p>\n There are many other checklists available, for a comprehensive list as well as those above, see the Equator Network website http:\/\/www.equator-network.org\/<\/a>. As well as items in the appropriate checklist, make sure your methods section reports on:<\/p>\n Describe the methods used for each aim\/hypothesis in the same order as given in the introduction.<\/p>\n In the results section you:<\/p>\n Don\u2019t duplicate information in text and tables\/figures. The results section is often quite short \u2013 a few paragraphs.<\/p>\n Tips:<\/p>\n To ensure that your statistical results are reported correctly, refer to the SAMPL guidelines, which can be downloaded from the equator network at http:\/\/www.equator-network.org\/reporting-guidelines\/sampl\/.<\/p>\n The first paragraph should contain a brief summary of your main findings, without re-stating the results too much. Don\u2019t forget these conclusions should correspond to, and be in the same order as, your original aims and objectives. i.e. what was the \u2018answer\u2019 to your research questions\/s?<\/p>\n Discuss each result in the same order as you reported aims, methods, and results, then give a global overview of the impact and meaning of your work in the context of current knowledge.<\/p>\n In discussing each result, give your interpretation of the meaning or implications of your work. Refer to previous work and explain whether your work agrees\/supports or does not support previous results. Explain how your work expands on previous knowledge. When citing previous publications, mention any limitations or biases as well as strengths of previous work, i.e. do a mini critical appraisal. When describing results of your own or other author\u2019s work, be as specific as you can, giving number of subjects and effect sizes rather than general statements. For example, rather than saying \u2018caesarean section rates have risen\u2019, say \u2018Smith and Jones, in their UK study of 150,000 pregnancies from 1990 to 2010, found that the annual caesarean rate rose from 20% (95% CI 18 \u2013 22%) to 35% (95% CI 33% – 37%)\u2019.<\/p>\n Explain the limitations of your study. A good place to start is consideration of any biases \u2013 selection, misclassification or confounding biases. Is your study sample representative of the population you are interested in? Did you ‘cherry-pick’ the data in any way? Discuss the generalisability (external validity) of your study, and whether it was study was adequately powered to find a positive result.<\/p>\n In conclusion, re-state the \u2018answers\u2019 to your research question\/s and take-away message. Do NOT state that \u2018further research is required\u2019! If you really must recommend further research, outline a specific study design and plan, and put it before the conclusions towards the end of the discussion.<\/p>\n Most journals require electronic submission. If the receiving editor decides your manuscript is good enough and meets the journal\u2019s policies, it will be sent out for review \u2013 usually two or three reviewers. The reviewers will make recommendations, which might be:<\/p>\n You will be notified by the editor of the decision. The reviewer\u2019s comments, which will be sent to you, are invaluable! If your manuscript is accepted subject to revisions, it is very important to address each comment in detail and with professional courtesy and respect to the reviewer. Always thank them for their comments.<\/p>\n It is hard to get published in a high-ranking journal! For example, for Thorax ( http:\/\/thorax.bmj.com), published by the British Thoracic Society and British Medical Journal group, the \u2018instant rejection rate\u2019 is 66%, and the acceptance rate 8% at the time of writing (November 2017).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Why write a paper? You would have started with an idea, developed a hypothesis, designed a study, and conducted your study to prove or disprove your hypothesis. Now you need to disseminate the results. \u2018If it is not published it never happened\u2019. This post may help you get organised to write your paper. A pdf … Continue reading How to write a paper<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[8,6],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=118"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":225,"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118\/revisions\/225"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=118"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=118"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.torusresearch.com.au\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=118"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Getting started<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
Structure of a scientific manuscript<\/h2>\n
Title page<\/h3>\n
Title<\/h4>\n
\n
Authors<\/h4>\n
Abstract<\/h3>\n
\n
Body of the Manuscript<\/h3>\n
Introduction and background<\/h4>\n
\n
Methods<\/h4>\n
\n
\n
Results<\/h4>\n
\n
\n
Discussion and conclusion<\/h4>\n
Writing tips and the final check<\/h2>\n
\n
Submitting your manuscript<\/h3>\n
\n
\n