Examples of statements on the Discussion section



Examples of Statements on the Discussion Section

Nahata, M. (2008). Tips for writing and publishing an article. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 42, 273-277.

“In the Discussion section, one should not present results again, but rather interpret the results, compare the data with those in previous studies, highlight the clinical significance of the results, and reach defendable conclusions(s). However, reviewers will not be impressed if the authors over-interpret that data and fail to consider the study limitations. Finally, the authors should briefly indicate what future studies may be undertaken to advance the knowledge in the area.” Pg 275.

Neill, U. (2007) How to write a scientific masterpiece. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 117, 3599-3602.

“You should start the Discussion section with a summary of the research presented and the implications for broader application. The Discussion should not simply be a recapitulation of the Results, but rather an interpretation of how each of the experiments supported your central hypothesis. This is your chance to add in supporting findings from the literature and to argue why your study is a conceptual advance over those studies. The end of this section should also touch on the areas left to investigate and mysteries that remain.” Pg 3600.

Smyth, J., Verweij, J, D’Incalci, M, and Balakrishnan, L. (2005) “The art of successful publication” EGGO 13 workshop report. European Journal of Cancer, 42, 434-436.

“Discussions should underline the major results with appropriate comments relating them to published literature, and explaining whether or not the new data agrees or disagrees with such comparisons. Authors are encouraged to explain why new findings are relevant and to identify potential avenues for further research, but discussions should not read like a future grant proposal! Discussions should be concise and should draw the reader to a conclusion justified by the data presented.” Pg 436.

Other references of possible interest

Cetin, S and Hackam, D (2005). An approach to the writing of a scientific manuscript. Journal of Surgical Research, 128, 165-167.

Kliewer, M. (2005) Writing it up: A step-by-step guide to publication for beginning investigators. American Journal of Roentgenology, 185, 591-596.

Lang, T. (2006). Documenting research in scientific articles: Guidelines for authors. Chest, 130, 1263-1268.

Naylor, W. and Munoz-Viveros, C. (2005) The art of scientific writing: How to get your research published! The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 6, 164-180.

Docherty, M. and Smith, R. (1999) Editorial: The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers. BMJ, 318, 1224-1225.

Skelton, J. and Edwards, S. (2000) Response to above editorial: The function of the discussion section in academic medical writing. BMJ, 320, 1269-1270.

Some possibly useful web links:











................
................

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

Google Online Preview   Download