how to write a scientific paper for publication

How to write a scientific paper for publication?

Dr Md Anisur Rahman AnjumMonday, July 14, 2014anjumk38dmc@gmail,com

01711-832397Associate Professor

National institute of OphthalmologyDhaka. Bangladesh

Before 1950 no structured formed.In 1950 IMRAD structure established. in 1978 the Vancouver Group, establish

guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to their journals.

What is IMRAD?

INTRODUCTIONI=

M=

R=

A=

D=

MATERIAL & METHODS

RESULT

AND

DISCUSSION

• IMRAD Format can’t cover all the field of a paper so it was modified with two other acrynom.

• TAS ….. IMRAD ….. CAR.

T

A

S

C

TITLE

AUTHOR

SUMMARY/ABSTRACT

IMRAD = INTRODUCTION. METHODS. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

CONCLUSION

A ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

REFERENCESR

Title

Title

The decision to read an article often rests on the appeal of its title. So it should be:

correctly represent the content and breadth of the study.

clear, concise, and informativecontain keywordsNo abbreviations are used.capture attention of the

reader.

Author

Author.Designation, degree, affiliation and address

of authors are to be clearly indicated, With additional details like telephone number,

email address of the corresponding author.

Abstract & Keywords

Abstract & Keywords

Abstract should cover each and every component of the study

150 words for ‘unstructured abstract’

250 words for ‘structured’ abstracts.

It should state the purpose of the study basic procedures, the principal conclusion and implications.

Abstract & Keywords

contain precise information and should not contain abbreviations.

Key words (or short phrases) 3 to 10, should be listed covering all the

aspects of the study. Use preferably the terms listed as Medical

subject headings (MESH) in Index Medicus (Medline)

Key words (or short phrases)

Introduction and Review of Literature

Introduction and Review of Literature

The goal or purpose of the study is clearly stated.

The introduction should contain: detailed information about the problem being

studied, and about the specific research question/

hypothesis.

Introduction and Review of Literature

Four or five pertinent publications related to the problem should be presented and critiqued.

No data or conclusions are to be reported.Do not review the literature extensively.The existing gaps in the knowledge or

conflicting data is to be highlighted.

Material & Methods

Material & Methods

• The selection of the subjects for the study has to be described clearly.

• Inclusion and exclusion criteria are to be mentioned with method of allocation to groups.

Material & Methods

The research design is to be described in detail.

Research design is the plan that is chosen to answer the research question.

The methods, apparatus and procedures are to be identified in sufficient detail to allow other workers to reproduce the results, if necessary.

Material & Methods

Give references of all the methods used in the study including statistical methods.

Identify precisely all drugs and chemicals used, including generic names, doses and routes of administration.

Material & Methods

Methods of elimination of errors viz blinding, introduction of control group and placebo, randomization etc are to be mentioned distinctly.

The measurement instrument including its psychometric qualities is described clearly. The psychometric qualities include validity, reliability, objectivity and precision.

Material & Methods

The data collection procedure is to be clearly described. The setting in which the study took place is describe. This information is useful to the reader in deciding whether results can be applied to his/her setting. The data analysis procedures are stated in precise terms.

Results

Results Present your results in logical sequence in the text,tables and illustrations. Do not repeat in the text all the data, in the tables or

illustrations.Emphasize or summarise important observations.Results section should contain only actuals, and no

Opinions.

Results All the patients included in the study should

be accounted for. There should not be any hesitation in reporting any negative or unexpected result.

Discussion

Discussion

The discussion should cover all the debatable aspectsof the study. It can go beyond the results obtained and can cover

methodological and the critical issues. It should not be misused as a platform to state

opinions. Readers should not be side tracked in to another topic

Discussion

Relate the observations to the other relevant studies.

Bring out similarities and conflicts.The new and important aspects of the study

and the conclusions drawn are to be emphasized.

The implications of the findings and their limitations are to be discussed.

Discussion

Scope and need for future additional research is to be discussed.

Link conclusions with goals of the study but avoid unqualified statements and conclusions not supported by your data.

State new hypothesis when warranted .Recommendations when appropriate may be

included.

Conclusion

Conclusion

A good paper ends with strong clear conclusion.A good paper is a “thunderbolt in reverse” it begins

with thunder and ends with lightningConclusion should be linked with the goals of the

study It should be limited to the boundaries of the study

Acknowledgement

Acknowledgement

• Who will be acknowledge:Person, whom has contribution for the article

but do not justify authorship should be acknowledge. Such as

General support by a department chair.Acknowledgement of technical help.Acknowledgement of financial (?) or material

support.

Acknowledgement

At an appropriate place in the article the title page. footnote or an appendix to the text depending on the journal requirement you can

write the acknowledgement

Reference

Reference

This is the most disturbing aspect in publications.

It is a wrong notion amongst the authors that providing a long list of references increases the validity (of their article) which is wrong.

References are to be written correctly with due care.

ReferenceCorrect abbreviated, accepted names, of the

journals to be mentioned. The number of references should be

reasonable (neither too many nor too few); in original article it will be not more than 30 but in review article it may be 50

ReferenceThe references are presented according to

standard rules of publication as specified by a particular journal. for eg,

whether Vancour style or Harward style is followed.

Some General Consideration

AbbreviationsAbbreviations. Use standard abbreviations (hr, min,

sec, etc) instead of writing complete words.Define all other abbreviations the first time they are

used, then subsequently use the abbreviation [e.g. Ampicillin resistant (AmpR)].

As a general rule, do not use an abbreviation unless a term is used at least three times in the manuscript.

Abbreviations

With two exceptions (the degree symbol and percent symbol), a space should be left between numbers and the accompanying unit. In general, abbreviations should not be written in the plural form (e.g. 1 ml or 5 ml, not mls).

Past, present, and future tense

• Past, present, and future tense. Results described in your paper should be described in past tense (you’ve done these experiments, but your results are not yet accepted “facts”). Results from published papers should be described in the present tense (based upon the assumption that published results are “facts”). Only experiments that you plan to do in the future should be described in the future tense.

•  

Third vs first person• Third vs first person. It is OK to use first person in scientific writing,

but it should be used• sparingly – reserve the use of first person for things that you want to

emphasize that “you” uniquely did (i.e. not things that many others have done as well).

• Most text should be written in the third person to avoid sounding like an autobiographical account penned by a narcissistic author. However, it is better to say “It is possible to ..” than to say “One could ...”. Writing that uses the impersonal pronoun “one” often seems noncommittal and dry.

• In addition, inanimate objects (like genes, proteins, etc) should be described in third person, not with anthropomorphic or possessive terms.

Thank You