482 – Lecture 1

1. 482 – Lecture 1 Anatomy of a manuscript…

2. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Abstract/Synopsis (scientific writing) • Introduction • Purpose • Hypothesis/Specific Aim(s) • Methodology to the research • Results of your findings • Discussion of those findings • Citations relevant to your paper

3. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Introduction • This introduces the reader to the relevance of the paper. It is the writer’s ‘sell’ to the importance of the paper. Care must be taken to keep the reader focused and progress logically toward the statement of the purpose. • Purpose • It’s ok to begin this sentence with, “the purpose of this paper was to…” Again, the flow of the introduction must logically take the reader to this point. • Hypotheses/Aims • Whether the author wants to state the hypotheses, or step back to the aims is a matter of taste. Sometimes both can be provided, and when that happens, perhaps an ‘underlying’ or ‘central’ hypothesis is stated for the benefit of the reader.

4. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Independent variable… •  (in an experiment) a variable that is intentionally changed to observe its effect on the dependent variable. (from Dictionary.com) • Dependent variable… • (in an experiment) the event studied and expected to change when the independent variable is changed. (from Dictionary.com)

5. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Methodologies • Either at the end of the introduction, or more appropriately, at the beginning of the Methods, the authors MUST make a statement related to the ethics boards involved with the research. These may include the IRB, the IACUC or BS. • Presented in the order of your results – think global to specifics… • May cite other papers for routinely published methodologies, but should still ‘briefly’ describe your approach. • Unique methodologies should be very specific and written so that others can follow your ‘recipe’. • Any time that equipment, products, etc., are listed, list the vendor, city and state parenthetically. • Methodologies MUST list any statistics (all) that have been applied to test means. This should be followed by the alpha level that was used by authors to determine significance.

6. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Results… • Generally the easiest element to write. Results should be presented in the order of methodologies, and maintain a ‘matter of fact’ feel to them. • Check with specific Journals/proposals to determine if there are constraints on tables and figures. • Never duplicate data. If they are presented in a table, don’t present in a figure. If they are presented in another paper, adequately cite. • Be consistent with the use of p-values and check for guidance from the Journal instructions if in doubt. Some journals prefer precise p-values, while others are ok with p< x.xx to indicate significance. Please note that it is sometimes necessary to indicate that it is not significant as well (p=x.xxor p>x.xx).

7. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Results… • Newer trends are using captions or brief title statements to ‘bullet’ the results. Remember, it is your job to communicate effectively, and placing captions/titles in specific sections assists the reader in ‘getting the point.’ • BE CAREFUL not to overstate your data, and be sure that you have done all the studies necessary to support your claims. If not, the reviewers will ask for those data eventually anyways… • Generally, results sections, as well as almost all portions of the text, are written in past tense. The project is completed, and manuscripts are designed to indicate what happened on your project. • Verb usage is very important in describing results. Descriptors like ‘higher’ or ‘lower’ can be very different than ‘increased’ or ‘decreased’. Misuse of these verbs can confuse a reader with regard to cross-sectional vs longitudinal/repeated measures studies.

8. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Discussion • The discussion is intended to expand on the results, not simply restate them. • This is the authors’ opportunity to explain/speculate on the findings. However, it is a fine line between being reasonable and overstating. Try to keep some balance, and always make it clear that speculation is the intention. I tend to use ‘present’ tense when I am speculating, and careful word-smithing can allow the author to convey that meaning without having to state that ‘we speculate…’ However, those phrases sometimes cannot be avoided. • A well-crafted discussion makes great use out of ‘transition’ statements to link paragraphs and thoughts. If results sections are the ‘fact of science’, the discussion section is the ‘art of science’. • Present both cases, particularly if your study is not consistent with other work. DO not overly bias your work by leaving out the ‘other side’ of the coin (if it exists). And, be sure to cite/include relevant work that supports your stance.

9. Manuscripts are often designed to look like experiments… • Discussion • Use great caution in overstating your claims, particularly if more data were needed to base that claim. Most assuredly, the reviewer/editor will request those data in order for the work to be published. • Alternatively, don’t completely understate your data, as it won’t excite the reader if the way your manuscript is written seems unimportant. • If you make any claims that ‘these data are the first’, or ‘no studies exist’, be sure that you are correct. Scour the literature and search in a number of ways to be thorough. • To follow-up on statements above, always focus on the data or the studies. DO NOT FOCUS on the authors when making discussing papers, particularly if it is negative.

10. Reference Lists… • Always attempt to cite the seminal paper, or a paper that best suits the types of experiments/stances that you are communicating. • Always note how the cited studies were performed. And in our field, careful attention must be made to species, the type of experiment and the tissues. • It is rare that reviews are cited, but they can be used strategically if you are wishing to convey a body of work to support your point.

11. References… • When conducting a search, it is often good to keep the abstract for your purposes, or generate an annotated bibliography for quick reference. • Great search engines are available in the current era of science. For the life sciences, PubMed Central is a powerful search engine. • We also have powerful citation software available, which can really facilitate the writing process…

12. Abstract… • Everything (relevant) that is contained in the paper should appear in the abstract. However, unless it is the point of the paper, you may choose to leave out difficult aspects… • There should be an introduction (1-2 lines), purpose statement, a brief methodology, results and conclusions. • Some believe that abstracts must contain data, so get a feel for the places your submitting. • If necessary, citations may be used, but generally, abstracts are for data obtained in the manuscript. • Each Journal has specific guidelines as to length and format of the abstracts. Check this carefully because this is the first and only item of the manuscript that is viewed when being sent to reviewers or editors upon submission.