INTRODUCTION: The problem of initiating the writing process is a well-known phenomenon, especially for young and inexperienced scientists. The purpose of this paper is to present an effective method to overcome this problem and increase writing efficiency among inexperienced scientists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twelve young scientists within the medical/surgical fields were introduced to the mind-to-paper concept. The first and last article drafts produced by each of the scientists were scored for language complexity (LIX number, Flesch Reading Ease Scale and Gunning Fog), flow, structure, length and use of references; and the results were compared. RESULTS: All participants produced one full article draft during each of the three dictation days. When comparing the first and last article draft regarding time used, no significant difference was detected. In general, the manuscripts were of high quality on all evaluated parameters, but language complexity had increased in the final manuscript. CONCLUSION: Mind-to-paper dictation for scientific writing is an effective method for production of scientific papers of good initial quality, even when used for the first time by inexperienced scientists. We conclude that practicing this concept produces papers of an adequate language complexity, and that dictation as a writing tool allows for fast transfer of ideas and thoughts to written text. FUNDING: not relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.
INTRODUCTION: The problem of initiating the writing process is a well-known phenomenon, especially for young and inexperienced scientists. The purpose of this paper is to present an effective method to overcome this problem and increase writing efficiency among inexperienced scientists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twelve young scientists within the medical/surgical fields were introduced to the mind-to-paper concept. The first and last article drafts produced by each of the scientists were scored for language complexity (LIX number, Flesch Reading Ease Scale and Gunning Fog), flow, structure, length and use of references; and the results were compared. RESULTS: All participants produced one full article draft during each of the three dictation days. When comparing the first and last article draft regarding time used, no significant difference was detected. In general, the manuscripts were of high quality on all evaluated parameters, but language complexity had increased in the final manuscript. CONCLUSION: Mind-to-paper dictation for scientific writing is an effective method for production of scientific papers of good initial quality, even when used for the first time by inexperienced scientists. We conclude that practicing this concept produces papers of an adequate language complexity, and that dictation as a writing tool allows for fast transfer of ideas and thoughts to written text. FUNDING: not relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.