Literature DB >> 17333033

[How do I write an original article? An introduction for beginners].

V Wenzel1, M W Dünser, K H Lindner.   

Abstract

Less than 50% of abstracts presented on scientific conferences get published as full articles. This manuscript is a hands-on instruction on how to collate a scientific investigation into an article. Criteria for authorship should be decided based on the Vancouver statement. The first step is a description of materials and methods including the statistical analysis (approximately 1,000 words), which should already be done during the study itself. The second step is describing the results without interpretation (approximately 350 words); graphs are better than tables. The discussion (approximately 1,000-1,350 words) is initiated with a short description of the most important results, followed by a defence of the model employed. Subsequently, the mechanisms of the results are discussed and put into context with the results of comparable studies; the clinical implication of the most important aspects should be discussed. This is followed by the limitations of the investigation to allow a realistic classification; the conclusions should be low-key rather than exaggerated. The last step is the introduction (approximately 350 words), which has to "hit the nail on the head" in order to attract the reader; this is followed by the abstract and references. Issues that are absolutely to be avoided are insufficient preparation of the study, no answers to the hypothesis of the study, contradictions within the manuscript, superficial discussion, changing terms, reflexive sentences, and a conclusion that is not supported by the data. The first author and mentor should write the first draft of the manuscript; subsequently, the co-authors have to contribute with constructive critique to improve the article until a final draft has been achieved after several rounds of revision and further critique. A journal should be targeted where the manuscript has a realistic chance of publication. If the reviewer's comments can be answered, a careful revision is always warranted and should be performed even if the editor rejected the manuscript. All parties involved should be informed about each step of the project by the first author in order to ensure enduring success.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17333033     DOI: 10.1007/s00101-007-1151-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesthesist        ISSN: 0003-2417            Impact factor:   1.041


  22 in total

Review 1.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

Authors:  D Moher; K F Schulz; D Altman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  . . . the soul of wit.

Authors:  J H Comroe
Journal:  Am Rev Respir Dis       Date:  1975-12

3.  Reporting on statistical methods to adjust for confounding: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Marcus Müllner; Hugh Matthews; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-01-15       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Up for grabs--authors are a dime a dozen: the problem of multiple authors.

Authors:  R Lazar
Journal:  Acta Paediatr       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.299

5.  Authorship criteria and disclosure of contributions: comparison of 3 general medical journals with different author contribution forms.

Authors:  Tamara Bates; Ante Anić; Matko Marusić; Ana Marusić
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-07-07       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  How to write an English medical manuscript that will be published and have impact.

Authors:  Amanda Tompson
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.549

7.  Who reviews the reviewers? Feasibility of using a fictitious manuscript to evaluate peer reviewer performance.

Authors:  W G Baxt; J F Waeckerle; J A Berlin; M L Callaham
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 5.721

8.  Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1997-01-23       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  The vexed question of authorship: views of researchers in a British medical faculty.

Authors:  R Bhopal; J Rankin; E McColl; L Thomas; E Kaner; R Stacy; P Pearson; B Vernon; H Rodgers
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-04-05

10.  How to get a rejected manuscript published.

Authors:  P P Morgan
Journal:  Can Med Assoc J       Date:  1985-07-15       Impact factor: 8.262

View more
  3 in total

1.  [Manipulating scientists].

Authors:  V Wenzel; B Zwissler; R Larsen
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 2.  [A guide to successful public relations for hospitals and emergency medical services].

Authors:  J Ausserer; J Schwamberger; R Preloznik; M Klimek; P Paal; V Wenzel
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.041

3.  How to write an article: Preparing a publishable manuscript!

Authors:  Vinod B Shidham; Martha B Pitman; Richard M Demay
Journal:  Cytojournal       Date:  2012-01-31       Impact factor: 2.091

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.