During writing process of the manuscript one of these can be selected based on the intensity of the discussion. Including limitations for your reader allows you to demonstrate you have thought critically about your given topic, understood relevant literature addressing your topic, and chosen the methodology most appropriate for your research. Another approach concerning this issue is to accomplish manuscript writing process within a week. However, generally, before onset of the writing process of the manuscript, its abstract might be already presented in various congresses. Nowadays, articles questioning available information, rather than confirmatory ones attract attention. 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. Kotz, D., & Cals, J. W. (2013). Present the contents of your section from narrow context (your study) to broader context (your field of study) (Ghasemi, 2019). 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. our colleagues from other medical disciplines) are not directly concerned with your subject matter but as mentioned above they critically review the manuscript as for simplicity, clarity, and effectiveness of its writing style. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Discussion. 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. 1) Does the manuscript contribute to the literature? Provide readers with a critical thinking through of your results, answering the so what? question about each of your findings. 62): Decide on the best way to present your data in the form of text, figures or tables (Hofmann, 2013). Describe the possibilities for continued research on your topic, including what might be improved, adapted, or added to ensure useful and informed future research. The most optimal approach to manuscript writing process is daily writing strategy where higher levels of motivation are persistently maintained. Comments coming from the reviewers should be criticized, but a defensive attitude should not be assumed during this evaluation process. Whats the difference between results and discussion? Provide the possibility of alternative interpretations, as your goal as a researcher is to discover and examine and not to prove or disprove. Instead of trying to fit your results into your hypothesis, critically engage with alternative interpretations to your results. Murray R. Finding a topic and developing an argument. and transmitted securely. **** Since conventionally passive voice is used in the scientific manuscripts written in the Turkish language, the above statement contradicts our writing habits. An effective conclusion section should include the following: University of Southern California (n.d.).

For the placement of references use of software programs detailed in other sections is a rational approach. Each paragraph begins with an indisputable introductory sentence about the topic to be discussed. If so, why might this be? Herein, at least drafts of the Introduction, and Material and Methods can be written, and even tables containing numerical data can be constructed. However summarizing the basic findings of the experimental studies in the first paragraph is generally recommended by the editors of the journal.[5]. Subheadings within your results section are primarily going to detail major findings within each important experiment. 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. Registration No 3,257,926) October 13, 2020. The first control should concentrate on the evaluation of the appropriateness of the logic of the manuscript, and its organization, and whether desired messages have been delivered or not. In many research papers, the conclusion, like the limitations section, is folded into the larger discussion section. The reason for this is that during writing process of the main text, the significant study outcomes might become insignificant or vice versa. Fundamental advantage of this approach is to gain a habit of making academic researches if one complies with the designated time schedule, and to keep the manuscript writing motivation at persistently high levels. In additi 15 Laboratory Notebook Tips to Help with your Research Manuscript. During this incubation period where the comments of the internal, and external referees are awaited, literature should be reviewed once more. research methods, contact with patients, preparation of a project, fund-raising, statistical analysis etc.) On the other hand, manuscript writing process should begin before the completion of the study (even the during project stage). Match the results with the research questions from the introduction. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 66(10), 1064. about navigating our updated article layout. Only present data that support the significance of your study. 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. There are a few common mistakes to avoid when writing the discussion section of your dissertation. are registered trademarks of Gold Biotechnology, Inc. We use cookies and other tools on this site. Instead of No instances of either postoperative death or major complications occurred during the early post-operative period use There were no deaths or major complications occurred during the early post-operative period. However during this procedure studies should be presented in a logical sequence (ie. The In line with the opinions of the referees, the manuscript can be critically reviewed, and perfected.[1]**. Start this chapter by reiterating your research problemand concisely summarizing your major findings. After noting the limitations, you can reiterate why the results are nonetheless valid for the purpose of answering your research questions. Indeed, if the reviewer thinks that it is difficult to correct the Discussion section, he/she use her/ his vote in the direction of rejection to save time (Uniform requirements for manuscripts: International Comittee of Medical Journal Editors [http://www.icmje.org/urm_full.pdf]). What possible factors might cause your findings different from other findings? 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. Another approach is collectioners approach. For intermediate paragraphs, a divide and conquer approach, meaning a full paragraph describing each of the study endpoints, can be used. Accordingly, the findings of the study are determined in order of their importance, and a paragraph is constructed for each finding (Figure 1). How to write and publish a scientific article.

If you are unsure whether to include the conclusion as part of your discussion or as a separate section, be sure to defer to the assignment instructions or ask your instructor. If you encountered problems when gathering or analyzing data, explain how these influenced the results. However the suitability of the title to the agenda of the target journal should be investigated beforehand. Nutrition in Clinical Practice, 22(6), 636-640.

Based on the scope of your paper, your conclusion could be anywhere from one to three paragraphs long. Ask yourself these questions: Your overall aim is to show the reader exactly what your research has contributed and why they should care. I have cited relevant literature to show how my results fit in. You can provide additional data in tables and figures as supplementary material. The discussion section. The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers: Much the same as that for structuring abstracts. Based on the discussion of your results, you can make recommendations for practical implementation or further research. [3] While referring these studies, (excl. This approach can be termed roughly as loss of the focus of the study In conclusion, the author(s) should ask themselves the following question at every stage of the writing process:. With the latter approach, the target is rapidly attained. We should also give information about our subject matter. Shona McCombes. Detail (a) sources of potential bias, (b) possible imprecision of measures, (c) other limitations or weaknesses of the study, including any methodological or researcher limitations. Bahadoran, Z., Mirmiran, P., Zadeh-Vakili, A., Hosseinpanah, F., & Ghasemi, A. Frequently asked questions about the discussion. Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal, 45(1), 1-5. What were the strengths and limitations of your study?

Moore, A. Avoid using a repetitive sentence structure to explain a new set of data. In essence, the methodology to be followed in writing the Discussion section is directly related to the selection of the target journal. If youre unsure of the best structure for your research, look at sample dissertations in your field or consult your supervisor. There ar Gold Biotechnology (U.S. 21-38): Springer. Academic medicine, 76(9), 889-896. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

89-90) and 3.16 (pp. Since they are unrelated both to the author(s), and subject matter of the manuscript, these referees can review our manuscript more objectively. Agronomy, 41. Even the best research has some limitations, and acknowledging these is important to demonstrate your credibility. 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. An official website of the United States government. Revised on

Are your findings very different from other studies? This can confuse the readers when they interpret the meaning of the data completely different from what the authors had in mind. Instead of structured sections of a manuscript (IMRAD): Introduction, Material and Methods, Results, and Discussion, Instead of in the Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine posters to be submitted in congresses are time to time discussed in Wednesday meetings, and opinions of the internal referees are obtained about the weak, and strong points of the study, Instead of a writing style which uses words or sentences with a weak logical meaning that do not lead the reader to any conclusion, Instead of white color; proven; nstead of history; to. 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. International journal of endocrinology and metabolism, 17(3). I have discussed and interpreted the results in relation to my research questions. Faber, J.

Bethesda, MD 20894, Web Policies Bordage, G. (2001). Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication.

(2017). The conclusion is more shorter and more general: it concisely answers your main research question and makes recommendations based on your overall findings. Suggestions for further research can lead directly from the limitations. How to write the discussion section of a scientific article. Cals, J. W., & Kotz, D. (2013). Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on: As well as giving your own interpretations, make sure to relate your results back to the scholarly work that you surveyed in the literature review. The conclusion is important, as it is specifically designed to highlight your researchs larger importance outside of the specific results of your study. Each paragraph should contain opinions in favour or against the topic discussed, critical evaluations, and learning points. Per APA (2020) guidelines, this section requires you to examine, interpret, and qualify the results and draw inferences and conclusions from them (p. 89). 2) What solutions can be recommended to solve this problem? Dont just repeat all the data you have already reported aim for a clear statement of the overall result that directly answers your mainresearch question. 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. 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. The new PMC design is here! A good research paper has both qualities of good studies and good writing (Bordage, 2001). from past to present, from a few to many cases), and aspects of the study contradictory to other studies should be underlined. Address possibilities for future research. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 66(9), 945.

Since this approach suits with surgical point of view, probably hunters approach serves our purposes more appropriately. In the light of these principles, as is the case in our daily practice, all components of the manuscript (IMRAD) can be written concurrently. Before writing down the manuscript, determination of 23 titles increases the motivation of the authors towards the manuscript. The form of your interpretations will depend on the type of research, but some typical approaches to interpreting the data include: You can organize your discussion around key themes, hypotheses or research questions, following the same structure as your results section.

mercy vow bishops sorrow respond