Use good writing, clear argumentations, and logical explanations in this section to support your conclusion (Hofmann, 2013). What goes in the discussion chapter of a dissertation? Therefore in this review we will deal with topics related to the general aspects of manuscript writing process, and specifically issues concerning only the Discussion section. Detail how your research findings might address critical gaps or problems in your field, Compare your results to similar studies findings, Consider alternative interpretations to your results. These results build on existing evidence of, The results do not fit with the theory that, The experiment provides a new insight into the relationship between, These results should be taken into account when considering how to, The data contributes a clearer understanding of, The generalizability of the results is limited by, The methodological choices were constrained by. Probably the most important mistakes made related to the writing process of a manuscript include lack of a clear message of the manuscript, inclusion of more than one main idea in the same text or provision of numerous unrelated results at the same time so as to reinforce the assertions of the manuscript. 4) Has a simple, clear, and effective language been used throughout the manuscript? In: Murray R, editor. On the other hand references should be promptly put in place while writing the manuscript, Sorting, and placement of the references should not be left to the last moment. Writing a scientific paper. However writing manuscripts is a challenging endeavour in that we physicians have a heavy workload, and English which is common language used for the dissemination of scientific knowledge is not our mother tongue. Effective writing and publishing scientific papers, part V: results. If relevant, I have considered alternative explanations of the results. What's in a Discussion section? should be used instead of white in color, definitely proven, past history, and in order to, respectively (ref. I have made relevant recommendations for further research or action. The introductory paragraph contains the main idea of performing the study in question. Bahadoran, Z., Mirmiran, P., Zadeh-Vakili, A., Hosseinpanah, F., & Ghasemi, A. Proper matching of the manuscript with the appropriate journal requires clear, and complete comprehension of the available data from scientific point of view. In addition, a research paper must be clear, short, and effective when presenting the information in an organized structure with a logical manner (Sandercock, 2013). In fact editors of the journal will not reserve the limited space in their journal for articles yielding similar conclusions. Published on Therefore, the authors should go over the manuscript for at least three times after finalization of the manuscript based on joint decision. Peat, J., Elliott, E., Baur, L., & Keena, V. (2013). These elements are important to sort your data based on groups (or treatments). The aim of the present review is to outline the main aspects of writing the discussion section of a manuscript. The results section is a section containing a description about the main findings of a research, whereas the discussion section interprets the results for readers and provides the significance of the findings. It is advisable to work on a manuscript regularly to avoid losing familiarity with the article.
Effective writing and publishing scientific papers, part VI: discussion. Tompson A. Indeed, it might be very difficult to remember relevant references to be placed in the Discussion section. What is the significance of your research? Expert internal reviewers have a profound knowledge about the subject, and they can provide guidance about the writing process of the manuscript (ie. 3) What will be the new, different, and innovative issue? After noting the limitations, you can reiterate why the results are nonetheless valid for the purpose of answering your research questions. Join our list to receive promos and articles. In conclusion, the major point to remember is that the manuscript should be written complying with principles of simplicity, clarity, and effectiveness. The objective of this review is to summarize the method of writing Discussion section which is the most important, but probably at the same time the most unlikable part of a manuscript, and demonstrate the easy ways we applied in our practice, and finally share the frequently made relevant mistakes. Without repeating Introduction section of the manuscript, the problem to be addressed, and its updateness are analysed. and transmitted securely. The study demonstrates a correlation between, Discussing whether the results met your expectations or supported your, Contextualizing your findings within previous research and theory, Explaining unexpected results and evaluating their significance, Considering possible alternative explanations and making an argument for your position, Contrary to the hypothesized association, The results contradict the claims of Smith (2007) that. Make sure there is no mismatch of the table number or the figure number in text and in figure/tables. However during this process, classical information should not be questioned except for special circumstances. Scientific writing: easy when you know how: John Wiley & Sons. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Do not forget that none of the manuscripts is perfect, and one should not refrain from writing because of language problems, and related lack of experience. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil.
Subsequently, in the light of the current literature this finding is discussed, new ideas on this subject are revealed, and the paragraph ends with a concluding remark. Dont just state that more studies should be done give concrete ideas for how future work can build on areas that your own research was unable to address. One mistake that some authors often make is to use text to direct the reader to find a specific table or figure without further explanation. In this paragraph, main topic should be emphasized without going into much detail. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. The next step is to prioritize your research data based on importance focusing heavily on the information that directly relates to your research questions using the subheadings. In the last paragraph of the Discussion section strong points of the study should be mentioned using constrained, and not too strongly assertive statements. Comparison of your results with other published works, Conclusion and possible implications of your study (including the significance of your study), Future research questions based on your findings, Highlight the significance of your findings. Several elements are needed to create your figures and tables. Setiati S, Harimurti K. Writing for scientific medical manuscript: A Guide for preparing manuscript submitted to biomedical journals. You can use graphs or figures to compare groups or patterns. 2) What solutions can be recommended to solve this problem? Do your results agree with previous research? How to write the discussion section of a scientific article. International journal of endocrinology and metabolism, 17(3). How to write an English medical manuscript that will be published and have impact. Write and highlight your important findings in your results. Teo, E. K. (2016). Common elements of the figures (Bahadoran, 2019): Tables in the result section may contain several elements (Bahadoran, 2019): Its not enough to use figures and tables in your result section to convince your readers about the importance of your findings. You need to support your result section by providing more explanation in the discussion section about what you found. Are your findings very different from other studies? Our management approach for intermediate paragraphs is divide and conquer tactics. (inadequate blinding, protocol contamination, lost to follow-up, lower statistical power of the study etc. Registration No 3,257,927) and Goldbio (U.S. Sometimes we get confused about how to differentiate between data and results. In the discussion, you explore the meaning and relevance of your research results, explaining how they fit with existing research and theory. Academic medicine, 76(9), 889-896. So, you should briefly explain your results to make your information clear for the readers. [1] Internal referees can be considered in 2 categories as General internal referees and expert internal referees General internal referees (ie. sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal For example an article bearing the title Use of barbed sutures in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy shortens warm ischemia time should not be sent to Original Investigations and Seminars in Urologic Oncology Indeed the topic of the manuscript is out of the agenda of this journal. Each paragraph begins with an indisputable introductory sentence about the topic to be discussed. However during this process your outcomes should be revealed fully, and roughly the message of the manuscript which be delivered. Welch HG. What are the variables or factors that might affect your results? Vieira, R. F., Lima, R. C. d., & Mizubuti, E. S. G. (2019). 39-48): Springer. These tables can be written down in the Results section. In qualitative research, results and discussion are sometimes combined. Other erroneous issues consist of superfluousness of the manuscript with unnecessary repetitions, undue, and recurrent references to the problems adressed in the manuscript or their solution methods, overcriticizing or overpraising other studies, and use of a pompous literary language overlooking the main objective of sharing information.[4]. Below is a list of questions to guide you when organizing the structure of your discussion section (Viera et al., 2018): The structure of the discussion section may be different from one paper to another, but it commonly has a beginning, middle-, and end- to the section. Since they are unrelated both to the author(s), and subject matter of the manuscript, these referees can review our manuscript more objectively. On the other hand, relevant or irrelevant feedbacks received from our colleagues can contribute to the perfection of the manuscript.
Journal of clinical epidemiology, 66(10), 1064. Herein your findings rather than those of the other researchers are discussed. Besides numerical values presented in the Results section should not be repeated unless required. 3) Is it suitable for the publication in the selected journal? It also allows you an opportunity to suggest avenues for future research on your topic. The other important mistake is to give too much references, and irrelevancy between the references, and the section with these cited references. Do the results support or challenge existing theories? Secondly, syutax, and grammar of the manuscript should be controlled.
Generally the length of the Discussion section should not exceed the sum of other sections (ntroduction, material and methods, and results), and it should be completed within 67 paragraphs.. Each paragraph should not contain more than 200 words, and hence words should be counted repeteadly. Provide a detailed account of the importance of your findings, Reiterate why your problem is important, detail how your interpretation of results impacts the subfield of study, and what larger issues both within and outside of your field might be affected from such results. Probably the most important mistake made while writing the Discussion section is the need for mentioning all literature references. Limitations of generalizability or utility of findings, often over which the researcher has no control, should be detailed in your Discussion section. Abstracts should not be referred, and review articles should not be cited unless required very much. Instead of Measurements were performed to evaluate the levels of CEA in the serum use We measured serum CEA levels, National Library of Medicine In Reporting and Publishing Research in the Biomedical Sciences (pp. On the other hand, manuscript writing process should begin before the completion of the study (even the during project stage). Mack, C. (2014). It should focus on explaining and evaluating what you found, showing how it relates to your literature review and research questions, and making an argument in support of your overall conclusion. https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/limitations. Van Way III, C. W. (2007). The discussion section. This period of time is adequate for completion of a manuscript within a few weeks which can be generally considered as a long time interval. Aggarwal, R., & Sahni, P. (2018). Your lab notebook is a foundation to your research manuscript. figures: to display the research data and to show trends or relationships, for examples using graphs or gel pictures. Comments coming from the reviewers should be criticized, but a defensive attitude should not be assumed during this evaluation process. Each paragraph should contain opinions in favour or against the topic discussed, critical evaluations, and learning points. This should be no more than one paragraph. As is the case with the whole article, text of the Discussion section should be written with a simple language, as if we are talking with our colleague. Since your results follow your method section, youll provide information about what you found from the methods you used, such as your research data. I have clearly explained the significance of my results. How did the results answer your research questions? [2] Herein, do not forget that, the objective should be to share our findings with the readers in an easily comprehensible format. However, in parallel with academic development, our novice colleague manuscripters can prefer collectioners approach.. In conclusion, academic writing is similar to other skills, and practice makes perfect. Results without any supportive evidence or equivocal results should not be written. Present the contents of your section from narrow context (your study) to broader context (your field of study) (Ghasemi, 2019). Before Address possibilities for future research. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the Discussion sections also require you to detail any new insights, think through areas for future research, highlight the work that still needs to be done to further your topic, and provide a clear conclusion to your research paper. In essence, the methodology to be followed in writing the Discussion section is directly related to the selection of the target journal. [1], The most important principle to be remembered on this issue is to obey the criteria of simplicity, clarity, and effectiveness. In additi 15 Laboratory Notebook Tips to Help with your Research Manuscript. Some of the common reasons the results and discussion sections might cause reviewers to reject a manuscript are (Bordage, 2001). You can also begin by highlighting the most significant or unexpected results. How to write and publish a scientific article. 4) How will our study contribute to the solution of this problem An introductory paragraph in this format is helpful to accomodate reader to the rest of the Discussion section. Accordingly, the findings of the study are determined in order of their importance, and a paragraph is constructed for each finding (Figure 1). In the book Writing in the Biological Sciences, author Angelika Hofmann recommends you to structure your results subsection paragraphs as follows: Each subheading may contain a combination of (Bahadoran, 2019; Hofmann, 2013, pg.
Bethesda, MD 20894, Web Policies In Reporting and Publishing Research in the Biomedical Sciences (pp. I have stated the practical and/or theoretical implications of my results. In addition, a pre-peer review process is recommended to obtain feedback on the manuscript. Include your least important data as supplemental materials when submitting to the journal. By declining, we will only use cookies to track your authentication session and consent preferences. Thus, evaluation of the cooled manuscript will be made from a more objective perspective, and assessment process of its integrity will be facilitated. The discussion section is probably the most creative section of your paper in terms of telling a story about your research (Ghasemi, 2019; Moore, 2016). Therefore, during construction of a draft, attention distracting environment should be avoided, and this step should be completed within 12 hours. On the other hand, we think that research team consisting of different age groups has some advantages. will determine task sharing, and make a favourable contribution to the perfection of the manuscript. The discussion chapter is where you delve into the meaning, importance and relevance of your results. Indicate the implication of your research. Previously, similar articles might have been published, however innovative messages, and new perspectives on the relevant subject will facilitate acceptance of the article for publication. The new PMC design is here! Your results should answer your research questions.
(2019). tables: to represent a large data and exact value. The Discussion section can be generally divided into 3 separate paragraphs as. Whats the difference between results and discussion? 104): Remember, at the heart of the discussion section is presenting an interpretation of your major findings. The conclusion is important, as it is specifically designed to highlight your researchs larger importance outside of the specific results of your study. Figures and tables present information about your research data visually. An effective conclusion section should include the following: University of Southern California (n.d.). Fletcher, R. H., & Fletcher, S. W. (2018). Start this chapter by reiterating your research problemand concisely summarizing your major findings. I have concisely summarized the most important findings. 8600 Rockville Pike Avoid using a repetitive sentence structure to explain a new set of data. However summarizing the basic findings of the experimental studies in the first paragraph is generally recommended by the editors of the journal.[5]. Indeed, editors of the journal recommend use of active voice so as to increase the intelligibility of the manuscript. (2016). In this section, based on your findings, you defend the answers to your research questions and create arguments to support your conclusions. There ar Gold Biotechnology (U.S. Nowadays, articles questioning available information, rather than confirmatory ones attract attention. For the results, figures and tables must be clear so the readers understand the message (Hofmann, 2013). The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers: Much the same as that for structuring abstracts. Only present data that support the significance of your study. During construction of the sentences, avoid unnecessary words, and active voice rather than passive voice should be used. Before submission of the manuscript to the target journal the opinions of internal, and external referees should be taken. Effective Medical Writing: The Write Way to Get Published. For the placement of references use of software programs detailed in other sections is a rational approach. 21-38): Springer. Sharing knowledge produced during academic life is achieved through writing manuscripts. Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal, 45(1), 1-5. Your conclusion section allows you to reiterate the main findings of your study, highlight their importance, and point out areas for future research. If youre unsure of the best structure for your research, look at sample dissertations in your field or consult your supervisor. Use the same order as the subheadings of the methods section. Daily working requirements unrelated to the manuscript writing might intervene, and prolong manuscript writing process. Match the results with the research questions from the introduction. In line with the opinions of the referees, the manuscript can be critically reviewed, and perfected.[1]**. March 21, 2019 Indicating limitations of the study will reflect objectivity of the authors, and provide answers to the questions which will be directed by the reviewers of the journal. What are new research questions to explore based on your findings? On the other hand in the last paragraph, future directions or potential clinical applications may be emphasized. Acta Scientiarum. But in quantitative research, its considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them. Sometimes the recommendations are saved for the conclusion. The discussion should show how your findings fit with existing knowledge, what new insights they contribute, and what consequences they have for theory or practice. During this incubation period where the comments of the internal, and external referees are awaited, literature should be reviewed once more. The title of the manuscript is as important as the structured sections* of the manuscript. Ghasemi, A., Bahadoran, Z., Mirmiran, P., Hosseinpanah, F., Shiva, N., & Zadeh-Vakili, A.
What is the objective of the study? Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. It serves almost as a rudimentary dra What is a Good Way to Read a Scientific Paper? Moore, A. Experienced researchers make guiding contributions to the manuscript. 2). The organization of the subheadings (subheading organization information below) for the results section usually mirrors the methods section. In conclusion, whoever the preferred referee will be, these internal, and external referees should respond the following questions objectively. Another approach is collectioners approach. You may also include information about the measurement of your data, variables, treatments, and statistical analyses. By closing this message, you consent to our, Hello, {{ user.first_name }} {{ user.last_name }}, Z')" data-type="collection" title="Products A->Z" target="_self" href="/collection/products-a-to-z">Products A->Z, potential variables that are not reported, over interpretation/under interpretation of the results, texts: to explain about the research data. What experiments did you conduct and what were the results? If there are potential confounding variables that you were unable to control, acknowledge the effect these may have had.
- Refugee Immigration Services
- Off The Shoulder Summer Dress For Wedding
- Words To Describe A Craft Business
- Damascus Destroyed 2021
- Christopher Kerr Author
- Cambodia News Today 2022
- Constructor Default Values Javascript
- My Lg Tv Doesn't Have Bluetooth
- Asus Tablet Flickering Screen
- Kevin Durant Wallpaper Cool