Handbook for Academic Medicine Writing Workshop : Academic ...

Handbook for Academic Medicine Writing Workshop

1

This reference handbook was compiled and annotated by members of the Academic Medicine Editorial Staff.

Managing Editor Anne Farmakidis Director, Staff Editing Albert Bradford Senior Staff Editors Mary Beth DeVilbiss Jennifer Campi Staff Editors Elizabeth S. Karlin Toni F. Gallo

2

Table of Contents

4

Guidelines for Writing Good Abstracts

9

Commentary

17 Article--Program Description

41 Article--Perspective

82 Research Report--Qualitative

69 Research Report--Quantitative

111 Guidelines for Writing Letters to the Editor

119 Additional Resources

3

GUIDELINES FOR WRITING GOOD ABSTRACTS

1. A good abstract gives the reader an accurate idea of the article's content but does not go into detail. The content may be information, ideas, or both. Good abstracts are especially important for database users, since they will have only the abstract to gain an impression of the article and whether it will be useful to them.

EXAMPLE A: The abstract below fulfills this criterion. Because this is an abstract for a research report, it is structured into four categories. Note also that:

? The year of the study is included; this is an important bit of information for readers, who can then make a judgment about whether the study data are up-to-date enough.

? The number of research participants and number of institutions involved are included; readers need this information to form a view of the value of the study, no matter what its findings are.

? The findings are not overstated. Overstating findings goes against the scientific caution that is needed in research.

Abstract

Purpose: Non-teaching services (NTS) are becoming increasingly prevalent in academic hospitals. This study was designed to determine if the presence of an NTS is associated with higher acuity and altered case mix on the teaching service.

Method: The authors carried out a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of data about all general medical admissions between January 1, 2005 and June 30, 2005 to either of two teaching hospitals in Rochester, New York. A total of 6,907 inpatients were studied, of whom 1,976 (29%) were admitted to medicine resident services and 4,931 (71%) were admitted to an NTS. Hospital billing databases were used to determine patient demographics, ICD-9 diagnoses, Charlson Comorbidity Index scores, and patient disposition.

Results: Compared with NTS patients, patients on resident services had higher median Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (3.0 vs. 2.0, P < .001), numbers of comorbidities (9.0 vs. 8.0, P ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download