1 / 18

discussionSection

discussionSection. Scientific Paper Writing Workshop Suzanne Fischer, MS Senior Editor FHI 360. This webinar is sponsored by: NIH/NIAID/DMID and is conducted by the International Clinical Studies Support Center (ICSSC) at FHI 360. ICSSC Services. STUDY SUPPORT & TRAINING.

ostinmannual
Download Presentation

discussionSection

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. discussionSection Scientific Paper Writing Workshop Suzanne Fischer, MS Senior Editor FHI 360

  2. This webinar is sponsored by: NIH/NIAID/DMID and is conducted by the International Clinical Studies Support Center (ICSSC) at FHI 360

  3. ICSSC Services STUDY SUPPORT & TRAINING • Science Writing • Good Clinical Practice • Ethics/IRB • GLP/Laboratory Safety and Quality • Protocol Development • and Review • Biostatistics • Site Assessment and Support • Data Management Please use the “Request for Assistance” form available on the ICSSC website: www.icssc.org or contact Laura Phillips at lphillips@fhi360.org

  4. IMRAD • Introduction: What is the problem? • Methods: How did you solve the problem? • Results: What did you find out? • Discussion: What does it mean?

  5. Contents of Discussion Section • Summarize the context • Answer your research question(s) • Interpret your results in context of existing knowledge • Explain any methodologic problems (e.g., bias) • Discuss implications of research findings • Provide suggestions for additional research

  6. Summarize the context Your first paragraph sets the context: We examined trends in adolescents' reports of discussion with parents about sexually transmitted infections and contraceptive methods from 1988 to 2002. Consideration of the role of parents in an adolescent's life and their potential influence on teen's sexual behavior decision making is an important component of a comprehensive prevention strategy. Teenagers cite their parents as the most influential person in their lives when they make decisions about sex—more than their peers and the media.

  7. Answer your research question Our study shows a clear decline in the share of 15–17-year-old female adolescents who report discussing STIs or contraceptive methods with a parent between 1995 and 2002 and an increase in females who report no discussions of either topic. Given that parents have the potential to influence their teen's sexual behavior, the results of this study are worrisome.

  8. Interpret your results There are several factors that could contribute to the decline in the number of girls who reported having discussions with a parent about STDs and contraception during our study period. For one, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that the number of U.S. adults who said HIV was a primary topic of concern dropped from a high of 92% in 1995 to 41% in 2002. Also, teenage pregnancies decreased during this time, so parents might have become complacent about teen sex.

  9. Interpret your results (continued) For each outcome measure, talk about: • Do your results confirm or differ from previous findings? • Do your results challenge previous knowledge? How?

  10. Explain any methodological problems • Missing data • Ethical issues • Acknowledge possible forms of bias • Changes to the protocol during the study • Differences in protocol among sites • Factors that affected treatment groups differently

  11. Methodological problems (continued) A chief concern is the design differences introduced by differences between the firms and investigators who conducted the surveys. Also, as with all survey data, the responses are limited in that teens are asked to report retrospectively about discussions of STDs and birth control methods with their parents. Retrospective self-reports may reflect biases introduced by memory or concerns about stigma. However, it is reasonable to assume that these biases operate similarly across the three waves of survey data.

  12. Discuss implications of findings • To what extent can your conclusions be generalized? • Do your results have theoretical implications? • How does your research relate to your field?

  13. State the implications of results clearly We have shown that blood culture confirmed enteric fever is a growing public health problem in Kathmandu, Nepal, and the best first-line treatment is now uncertain…Public health measures should be implemented to reduce transmission, community vaccination against S. typhi should be considered, and adequately powered controlled trials of alternate, affordable antibiotics must be performed. Without such measures, Kathmandu will remain, as it is today, an enteric fever capital of the world.

  14. Provide suggestions for additional research • Do your findings raise new questions for future research? • Does your work have implications for the methodologic design of future research?

  15. Tips for discussion section • Begin with a brief synopsis of the answer to your research question. • Present information logically. • Refer to other studies, as necessary. • Don’t introduce new results.

  16. Discussion exercise Review the discussion section of the paper and see how well it: • Summarizes the context • Answers the research question • Interprets the results • Explains any methodological problems • Discusses implications of findings • Provides suggestions for future research

  17. Chat What do you think?

  18. POLL Do you think the discussion section was: • Perfect • Good • Adequate • Poor

More Related