180 likes | 330 Views
How to Write a Scientific Paper. Hann-Chorng Kuo Department of Urology Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital. Construction of A Scientific Paper. Title page Abstract Manuscript References Figures Tables All must be prepared in double-space with page numbered on the manuscript.
E N D
How to Write a Scientific Paper Hann-Chorng Kuo Department of Urology Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital
Construction of A Scientific Paper • Title page • Abstract • Manuscript • References • Figures • Tables • All must be prepared in double-space with page numbered on the manuscript
Central Theme of the Paper • What are the purposes of this study? • What previous studies already show • How to design the study • Tool for assessments • How to analyze the results • How to present the data and discuss them • What is the impact of this study
Originality is the most important • Do not follow previous works • Make small changes • Detailed assessment • Large patient scale • Long-term follow-up • Different statistics • Do a randomized, double-blind, placebo- controlled study
Start writing the paper once you have a new idea • Introduction – when you are searching previous studies • Materials and methods – designing study • Results – when you make expected results • Discussions – during harvesting the data • Try to write a proposal for any study • Once you complete the study, the paper had been done
Reviewer’s recommendation • Is this paper significant? New? • Scientific quality? superior good fair poor • Presentation? • Is the title specific and appropriate for literature search retrieval? • Is the abstract complete yet succinct? • Does the abstract provide details?
Guidelines for assessing scientific articles • Does the introduction explain the topic and cite appropriate previous work? • Are the objectives clearly stated in the introduction? • Is the study population detailed adequately in the materials section? • Are the methods described well enough to reproduce the experiment or investigation?
Guidelines for assessing scientific articles • Can the reader assess the results based on the data provided? • Do the data presented supported the author’s conclusions? • Have the authors provided the reader with potential problems and limitations of study • Are the references complete, accurate and appropriately cited in the text
Abstract • Purposes– point out the key purpose • Materials and methods– study designed, main inclusion and exclusion criteria, assessment methods, primary end-point • Results – number of subjects, results of primary and secondary end-points • Conclusions– significance of results on key purposes • Key words
Introduction • Short description of history and disease • Clinical relevance of previous works • Hypothesis of this study • Purposes of the study –why we have to do this study, any clinical implication if the purpose of the study is achieved • Design of the study
Materials and methods • Number of patients enrolled • Inclusion criteria • Exclusion criteria • IRB and informed consent • Assessment methods • Primary and secondary end-points • Definition of therapeutic results
Results • Number and demographics of subjects • Results of primary end-point • Results of secondary end-point • Comparative study • Adverse effects • Tables and figures • Kaplan-Meier survival curve
Discussions • The most important findings in study • Do not repeat descriptions in Introduction • Clinical implication of the results • Cite references to back-up your discussion • Difference of results of this study from other reported results • Do not discuss anything the results did not show
Conclusions • One or two sentences to conclude your study • Do not conclude anything your results did not support or show • Make a strong conclusion
References • Cite the newest references • Cite the references of the possible reviewers • Do not cite irrelevant references • Too many references is not necessary
Reviewer’s Comments • Comments • Accept as is • Accept with minor revisions • Major revisions • Major revisions with low priority • Reject
Reply of Reviewer’s comments • A reply with many critiques is better than rejection • Reply the comments as soon as possible • Make changes according to the reviewers’ comment • Make changes and submit to another journal if it is not accepted • The prepared paper must be published !!