how to write a basic research article to be relevant for the readers of european urology

How to write a basic research article to be relevant for the readers of European Urology

Jean-Nicolas CORNUAssociate Editor

European Urology

Context

• Basic research– Leads to new knowledge– Provides scientific capital– Is the fund from which

the practical applications of knowledge must be drawn

National Science Foundation, 1953

Courtesy of the National Cancer Institute (NCI/NIH)

Cancer

Functional

Kidney/stones

Andrology/male

Urogynecology

European Urology contextHigh-impact

Broad readershipMostly focused on clinical issues / patients care

« Relative relevance »

Clinical implications / applicationsTranslational work

Please tell us the whole story…

Reasons for rejection

• Too weak (major issue for basic science) • Too focused (one slice of salami)• Not relevant for all readers (model)• Results consisting in purely technical aspects

Please, understand the concept of primary

rejection…

We DO WANT YOUR BEST WORK IN EUR UROL

How to optimize • TOPIC: is it urology or about urology• RESEARCH QUESTION: relevant for a urologist ?• RATIONALE: make it obvious for a urologist – it requires a

clinical context• METHODS: describe everything – DO USE supplementary

data / supplementary methods• RESULTS: make your work « talk » to a urologist optimize

your displays (spend enough t/e/m) – DO USE supplementary data / supplementary methods

• INTERPRETATION: be accurate – and relevant

Good examples

• Self explanatory title• Could be of interest for urologists

Good examples

Rationale/objectives

…

…

…

General context

Quick summary of known priciples

Rationale for studying mechanisms

Clear statement

Quickly say why does it make sense

MethodsEnough detailed and

referenced to be reproduced

Use of appendix

Methods

• Keep it simple, organized and straight forward• Descriptions should be crisp and accurate (word

count!) – use suppl data• Statistics need to be clearly defined (it‘s your tool

– as well as subjects – will be reviewed !!)• Ethical permission has to be given – references

have to be adequate • If the methods section is unclear, the ms will fail!

Presenting results

Results

Figures

Make it perfect (revision?)

Up to… what you want

• Supplementary content is like « always necessary » in a big basic research

• Always better than publishing– the ideas– then methods– Results in salami– Applications/extensions you have already in the

box

Tell a story !!

Presenting results rules

Short but answering the questionsRefer to pictures and tables - The text is your speech - Science is in the tables and figuresUse sub-sections help to enhance readibilityBe accurate, credible (units!)Do not overinterpret at this stage

Discussion• Not too long• Put you results in perspective• Explian the potential

relevance• Generate (reasonable) new

hypothesis• Do not make pure statements• Do not sell the paper at this

time: Less is more, data are everything

Conclusion• Study needs to be relevant for clinicians ++++• Original / Novel • If the study is not of interest for a broad readership in Eur Urol, it

may be more adequate for submission to a specialized journal (e.g. if you describe a new method or a specific technique): you won‘t lose time

• Critical importance of material & methods• Figures and tables are th most important part of the work and need

your energy• Discussion: put in perspective• Sufficient amount of data / convincing techniques to support the

conclusion : do not over interpret