How to Write a Scientific Paper "Publish or perish" A Motivation to Learn More

.........................................................................................................................
Ebtisam Elghblawi
Department of dermatology, BUM Hospital, Tripoli-Libya

Based on science direct and Pubmed search engine, Key words: scientific writing, component of scientific writing, planning writing, manuscript writing, writing skills and writing tips, writing guidelines, medical manuscript, and format of writing.

Some general hints in writing an article

Writing up is a daunting task; it involves a great deal of planning, preparation and time, it is simply a skill born from practice. In order to write, you need to read.

This article shall supply the researcher with a few simple guidelines on how to prepare, and write an organized scientific paper, which shall be ranging from its early drafting in order to improve the manuscript, and then its final publication (Andrei V.Alexandrov, 2004, Parati G, Valentini M, 2005, Nahas FX, Ferreira LM, 2005).

The approach in this article is the only way, nonetheless likely not the best way to write a scientific paper (Selma Cetin, and David J. Hackam, 2005).

Any manuscript consists generally speaking of 4 main sections; why you start? (Introduction, background and hypothesis), what you did (methods), what you gained (results), what does it mean (discussion) (David J Pierson, 2004). Before starting writing up, search the literature for similar resources dealing with your topic (Andrei V.Alexandrov, 2004). Consult the mentor when possible, because after all he/ she is the senior author (Andrei V.Alexandrov, 2004, J. Smyth, J. Verweij, M, et al, 2006). Good writing shall involve using of simple terms; in a direct order with its objectivity and then report it with a good discussionn (Nahas FX, Ferreira LM, 2005).

Bear in mind to avoid a very excessive lengthily article, which makes them harder to be evaluated or read by the anticipated readers, if published (Szklo.M, 2006).

Show your draft to your colleagues for critique to refine and revise, and in order to improve it as well, and if English is not your mother language, show it to native who can improve its text and wording (Alexandrov AV, Hennerici MG, 2006, Amanda Tompsonm, 2006).

Research is an important tool for developing and innovations (Albaeean JW, Scholes J, 2005), because without it no advance can be achieved or discovering a new phenomenon (Nte AR, Awi DD, 2006), additionally, to advance the state of scientific knowledge plus advancing the career in the mean time (Rosenfeldt FL, Dowling JT, et al, 2000).

Furthermore, it is important to publish those results in order to be retrieved and duplicated/ replicated; otherwise the research will be incomplete and irrelevant. Therefore writing a scientific paper demands skill, and experience in order to present it to the specific audience in a well organized structure chronologically, with a clear purpose to answer the question which been investigated (Cetin S, Hackam DJ, 2005, Nte AR, Awi DD, 2006).

Any journal shall involve the main following three main factors; the authors, the reviewers and the editors. The last two are mandatory to present the scientific article to the well accepted presentation for publication (Branson RD, 2004, Zheng JW, 2005). Its been estimated that about 5% will be accepted for publication, whereas 50% will be rejected, and about 45% will be returned to the author with some suggested notes to be followed (Brian F McCabe, 2004). There are some suggested publication failures; either the author don't know how to start writing or don't know where to put and where (Kliewer MA, 2005 & 2006).

The objective of this article to present the main anatomy of a scientific paper, put forwards some common mistakes, presents some science-writing rules, and offers some science-writing tips. At the end, research results either can only confirm or reject a hypothesis.

It is a great deal to think of what kind of writing shall this paper involve, it can range from a research report, to many such as; original work, review paper, editorial, and case report, …etc).

Consider the word IMRaD in structuring your paper:
1 Title- subject been studied
2 Abstract- What did I do in a nutshell/ summary of the paper (main reason for the study, results and conclusions).
3 Introduction- why the problem been investigate
4 Materials & Methods- how to solve that raised problem
5 Results- what was gained?
6 Discussion- what that result means, if its significant
7 Acknowledgements- who helped me
8 References- what work been looked through
9 Tables- extra information
10 Figures- extra information

Title - should be catchy and informative.
The title is the most important part of your paper, it alerts the reader to topic of your paper, generally speaking it sells the article (Andrei V.Alexandrov, 2004), therefore it should be short, simple, specific and concise describing the work done in the presented article, so make the title dynamic and informative, rather than descriptive, with consideration for the proposed and intended audience. Also be specific, and mention if paper is a human, animal or bench study

Include author name, highest academic degree, affiliation, email address, source of funding if any, phone, and fax of the correspondent.

Abstract
A good abstract should be accurate, self-contained, concise and specific, non-evaluative, coherent, and readable. The abstract wording differ from one journal to another, some requires 100-120 and others 200-300 words limit; it should start with an introductory sentence stating the raised question to be investigated, and what supposed to happen (hypothesis) (M. J. Kern, and H. N. Bonneau, 2003), then summarizing the goals, followed by 3-4 sentences addressing the main methods carried-out, and on whom , then 3-4 sentences about key finding of the study with analysis and lastly a statement of conclusions and recommendations. Abstract is the synopsis of the paper, so that the reader will decide to read your article or not. Generally speaking, writing an abstract means to extract and summarize, and be to the point quickly. However abstract is the first part, It must be written last as it will summarize the work done. This means simply the order of writing best will be as the following: Introduction, Methods & Materials, Results, Discussion, Statistics, Abstract, and, finally, Title. Avoid very long abstract, and use of abbreviations. Do not include any information, which is not covered in the manuscript, do not include tables, graphs, or references. Also, avoid any detailed descriptions of methods. Avoid mentioning any prior work in the abstract.

Introduction - Classic introduction 3 paragraphs:
Introduce the readers to the subject under study with its background, and state why you are interested in doing it (objectives), and what question you are going to address under study and what you are going to prove, and how you intend to answer and discuss them, how it relates to previous work in the area with careful reference selection findings (Brian F McCabe, 2004, W.P Naylor, A.Munoz-Vivevos, 2005, Selma Cetin, and David J. Hackam, 2005). That simply involves what you know about the subject by a through complete literature review, and what you do not know by constructing a hypothesis (objective and purpose), and then what your paper aims to accomplish.

Describe the research strategy. Explain the theoretical implications of the study, and summarizes the relevant literature in that area.

Finally above all, it is important to include a concluding paragraph stressing the importance of your work in the article.

Materials & Methods
It is the easiest part for most authors (Brian F McCabe, 2004). Structure your method clearly and precisely with sub-heading, such as; subjects, selection criteria, data collection and procedure, statistical methods. Start by describing the study subject; whether they were normal volunteers, patients, or animals; with referring to subject selection criteria by defining age, sex, diagnosis…etc in a demographic table if it was a retrospective study, and how they are recruited; if randomly or not, exclusion and inclusion criteria if its prospective study, and indicate if there is a pilot study and control group, and describe the control subject as well, also get the approval of local medical ethics committee (animal/ human study) (M. J. Kern, and H. N. Bonneau, 2003), Signed informed consent form by subjects or their legal representatives (in critical conditions).

If the study involved using an equipment, describe it in details with referring to how it was calibrated and validated (R.D Branson, 2004), accepted standard measurement, product source, list of device used, Detailed descriptions of the devices; the name/model, manufacturer, and city and state of the manufacturer., timeline for procedures and measurements, any interventions were applied and when, and what data were collected, and timing of measurement with timing for interventions.

Outline how specimens were prepared if there is any. If animals were used, define their strains, with their age and weight. Describe any specimen prepared and how was made.

Statistical analysis
consult you mentor and the statisticians beforehand, state how data were collected and how handled, name the statistical test used to evaluate the data, state the sample size, and power calculations, and indicate the probability level, and why? Start by descriptive statistics, then used a specific one when needed for comparison. Identify clearly the independent variable (predictor), and the dependent variable (outcome), and see if there are any associations. If it is complicated protocol, include a diagram, table or flowchart to explain the methods you used.

Lastly indicate why this method was chosen, and when it was been carried. Therefore, it is mandatory to present detailed description on how study was performed, and what was done to answer the raised research question in the article, so another scientist can judge the appropriateness of the method applied, repeat it (Andrei V.Alexandrov, 2004).

Results
Its heart of the article, it is the main reason seeking for publication (Brian F McCabe, 2004). Results can either support or refute the proposed hypothesis.

Simply just state those important data achieved with numbers and statistics in a logical manner, and be to the point. Bear in mind the shorter you can present the results, the better (Alexandrov AV, Hennerici MG, 2004). Do not give opinions or speculations. Avoid abbreviations unless it's been clearly defined and spelled out clearly. State the hypothesis you have applied in the study, with justification, put the results, and see if the results support any previous published findings to justify your conclusions (Alexandrov AV, Hennerici MG, 2006). Avoid giving details about irrelevant topics such as the programme been used for to enter the data (Streiner DL., 2007). Highlight the originality of your work if it is in a wording. Thereafter begin with the major positive findings; also give negative findings at the end of the results section as if it was not anticipated, then review your hypothesis to see what went wrong, and consider if there should be a recommendation to repeat the further study in the future. Present statistical information using statistical terms appropriately, Acknowledge any problem with data (e.g. small sample size, limited follow-up time etc.), Use well-designed tables, graphs, flow charts, histograms and figures to present your results as its simple and self-explanatory; be sure to cite and summarize them in the text (Kallet RH, 2004). A well-designed table should stand on its own without further clarification.

Discussion
It's the most challenging, and harder part of a paper (Rosenfeldt FL, Dowling JT, et al, 2000), you need to explain the meaning of the achieved results, and explore its significance to the reader (Hess DR, 2004), Indicate what they mean, and how its analyszed (Kallet RH, 2004), and if it was something new (novel). Start by evaluating and interpreting the results implications with referring to the hypothesis/ original question applied, any benefits and drawbacks, also if the gained data support the proposed hypothesis in your study, and if results were consistent with other previous investigators reports and if it does support it, and if the results were unexpected, explain what was the limitations, and why, and if the conditions were different, and if a further research is recommended to carry on to answer those unexplained results. Stay connected in your discussion between your study question and results, and see if there is any association between them. Let the results speak themselves; do not try to show how much your results are terrific (Andrei V.Alexandrov, 2004).

Look for Similarities and differences between your results and the work of others, which should clarify and confirm your conclusions. Negative results should be accepted as such without an attempt to explain them away. Try to ask yourself the following questions: Did I add something new in here?, Did my study resolve some of the original problem?, What conclusions and speculative propositions can I draw from my study?

Conclusions
Conclusions have to be based on the present study findings (Alexandrov AV, Hennerici MG, 2006). It should be simple and clear to be noticed (Alexandrov AV, 2004). It has to be to what you believe that you have proven (Brian F McCabe, 2004), it's actually conceptualization, and if you recommend any further work to be done in the future to define the problem.

Acknowledgments - as needed
A thank to those who helped.

References
Reference should be checked for completeness and accuracy before submission, Refer to articles from peer-reviewed journals (or those being "in press"), Limit list to key citations, Cite references throughout the paper, Refer to reference guidelines for targeted journal

Submitting the Paper for Publication
Before submitting, you need to consider the followings; Selecting a journal, read and follow the "instructions for Authors" in order to meet the proposed criteria of submission; because it varies from one journal to another (Brian F McCabe, 2004), Don't forget to number the pages as been instructed in the intended journal to apply, Understand issues of copyright, Organize materials for submission, proof read several times, request internal review prior to submission, lastly remember every article has a home.

Common cause for rejection to publish:
Piles of papers are submitted to scientific journals annually. Rejection rates are escalating in most well-known journals. Apply the reviewer's comments to improve your paper. 50% of initially rejected articles are eventually published somewhere else, (David J Pierson, 2004). The common reasons for rejections are; Insufficient and inaccurate data, poor study design, incomplete statistics, over interpretation of data, out dated information, difficult to follow reading- failure to convey the author message- (do not use big words, be simple and straight), biased or too small sample size, incomplete review of literature, defective tables/ figures, poor organization, submitting to the wrong journal- out side the scope of the journal interest, did not follow the journal instructions, failure to appreciate and comply with the peer review comments and resubmit. Remember lastly perseverance can pay off.

Albarran JW, Scholes J. How to get published: seven easy steps. Nurs Crit Care. 2005 Mar-Apr;10(2):72-7.

Alexandrov AV, Hennerici MG. Writing good abstracts. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;23(4):256-9. Epub 2006 Dec 29.

Amanda Tompson, How to Write an English Medical Manuscript That Will Be Published and Have Impact, Surg Today (2006) 36:407-409.

Andrei V.Alexandrov, How to write a research paper, Cerebrovascular diseases; 2004; 18,2; ProQuest Medical Library.

Branson RD. Anatomy of a research paper.Respir Care. 2004 Oct;49(10):1222-8.

Brian F McCabe, Editorial, How to write a scientific paper, the annals of otology, rhinology and laryngology, 2004; 113;7; ProQuest Medical Library.

Cetin S, Hackam DJ. An approach to the writing of a scientific manuscript. J Surg Res. 2005 Oct;128(2):165-7. Epub 2005 Sep 12.

David J Pierson, The Top 10 Reasons Why Manuscripts Are Not Accepted for Publication, respiratory care, 2004 vol 49 no 10, pg 1246- 1252.

Franklin L. Rosenfeldt, John T. Dowling, Salvatore Pepe and Meryl J. Fullerton, How to write a paper for publication, Heart, Lung and Circulation ,Volume 9, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 82-87.

Hess DR. How to write an effective discussion. Respir Care. 2004 Oct;49(10):1238-41.

J. Smyth, J. Verweij , M. D'Incalci, L. Balakrishnan, ''The Art of Successful Publication''ECCO 13 Workshop Report, european journal of cancer 42, 2006, 434-436.

Kallet RH, How to write the methods section of a research paper.Respir Care. 2004 Oct;49(10):1229-32.

Kliewer MA. Writing it up: a step-by-step guide to publication for beginning investigators.J Nucl Med Technol. 2006 Mar;34(1):53-9.

M. A. Kliewer, Writing It Up: A Step-by-Step Guide to Publication for Beginning Investigators, AJR:185, 2005, pg 591- 596.

M. J. Kern, and H. N. Bonneau, Approach to Manuscript Preparation and Submission:How to Get Your Paper Accepted, Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 58:391-396 (2003).

Nahas FX, Ferreira LM, [The art of writing a scientific paper], Acta Cir Bras. 2005;20 Suppl 2:17-8. Epub 2005 Nov 4.

Nahas FX, Ferreira LM., [The art of writing a scientific paper], Acta Cir Bras. 2005;20 Suppl 2:17-8. Epub 2005 Nov 4.

Nte AR, Awi DD., Writing a scientific paper: getting to the basics. Niger J Med. 2007; 16(3):212-8.

Parati G, Valentini M. How to write a scientific paper, Ital Heart J Suppl. 2005 Apr;6(4):189-96.

Richard D Branson, Anatomy of a Research Paper, respiratory care, 2004 vol 49 no 10.

Selma Cetin, and David J. Hackam, An Approach to the Writing of a Scientific Manuscript, Journal of Surgical Research, 2005, 128, 165-167.

Streiner DL., A shortcut to rejection: how not to write the results section of a paper, Can J Psychiatry. 2007; 52(6):385-9.

Szklo.M, Quality of scientific articles, Rev Saude Publica, 2006, 40 Spec no.:30-5.

W.P Naylor, A.Munoz-Vivevos, The art of scientific writing: How to get your research published, The jouranal of contemporary dental practice, vol 5, No 2, 2005, pg 2-11.

Zheng JW. Try to improve journal quality by improving standards and editing process, Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2005 Apr;14(2):97-8.