Alessandro VolpeAlessandro Volpe

SCDU UrologiaSCDU Urologia

Università del Piemonte OrientaleUniversità del Piemonte Orientale

AOU Maggiore della CaritàAOU Maggiore della Carità

NovaraNovara

How to write a scientific How to write a scientific paperpaper

Title, abstract, bibliographyTitle, abstract, bibliography

The Title

• The title is very important

• First - often only - text of your paper that is read

• Must attract readers to read more

• Must clearly state what your paper is about

• Must have correct terms (i.e. online searches = MeSH terms)

• New England Journal of Medicine– Concise and descriptive

• Lancet– Concise but informative

• Annals of Internal Medicine– As short as possible but explaining the essential

content

• British Medical Journal– Concise

The TitleGuidelines for authors

• Must be concise and informative

– 10–12 words or shorter– Accurately describe the findings of your

paper– Use words that are essential, easily

recognizable

• Must be clear, representative, interesting

• Avoid jargon, abbreviations, metaphors, creative words

The Title

• Describe the content of the paper in 2-3 sentences

• Make a summary: remove useless words and any reference to the results

• Write a temporary title

• Revise the title. You can split the title in 2 parts: 1) main topic 2) study type

• Checklist:

– Is it accurate?

– Can it be confusing?

– Does it include all essential words?

– Is it interesting?

The TitleAdvice

The Title

The Title

8

• Define: Use few essential words that are easily recognized by readers, and accurately describe your findings.

• Attract: Your paper title is the first, and maybe only, part of your paper to be read.

• Use common MeSH terminology: Readers of search, indexing and abstracting services depend on the accuracy and recognition of your title. Wrong words lead to wrong readers.

The TitleTake home message

• The abstract is very important !!

• It is the only part of the paper that is freely available to all readers on the web

• It is generally the first part of the manuscript that is read by reviewers and editors

• It is often the only part of the manuscript to be read

• It should be the last section of the manuscript to be written

The Abstract

A well prepared abstract should enable the reader to:

- identify the basic content of the manuscript quickly and accurately

- determine its relevance to their interests

- decide whether to read the document in its entirety

The Abstract

• Use short and clear sentences• Comply with the journal’s rules (word count,

structure)• You can use sentences from the various

sections of the manuscript• For brevity, parts of the abstract may be

written as phrases rather than complete sentences

• Be coherent! All information included in the abstract must be found in the text!

• Ask a colleague to read it: does he get the message?

The Abstract

• Standard IMRED (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion)

• Generally more detailed for original paper => see Eur Urol– Background– Objective– Design, settings and participants– Measurements– Results and limitations– Conclusions

• Sections can be skipped if appropriate

Structured abstract

Eur Urol structured abstract

• Importance of the topic• The abstract should begin with a sentence

or two explaining the clinical (or other) importance of the study question.

Background

20

• What’s new in the manuscript• State the precise objective or study

question addressed in the manuscript (e.g., ''To determine whether. . .''). If more than one objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated

Objective

• State the type of the study (prospective/retrospective, RCT…) and the years of the study

• Describe the study setting (e.g. general community, primary care or referral center, private or institutional practice, ambulatory or hospitalized care – single institutional or multicentric)

• State important eligibility criteria and key sociodemographic features of patients

• The numbers of participants and how they were selected should be provided

Keep it simple – Careful to word restrictions

Design, setting and participants

• The essential features of any interventions (surgical or medical) should be described

• The nonproprietary drug or device names should be used unless the specific trade name is essential to the study

No interventions in our example

Interventions

• The essential features of any interventions (surgical or medical) should be described.

• The nonproprietary drug or device names should be used unless the specific trade name is essential to the study

No interventions in our example

Interventions

• Indicate:– the primary and secondary study

outcome measurement(s)– the main statistical analysis

Outcome measurementsand statistical analysis

• The main outcomes of the study should be reported and quantified

• Complications or sequelae of the interventions used must be detailed

• The previously reported objectives need to be met

• Limitations of the study should be acknowledged

Results and limitations

• Provide only conclusions of the study directly supported by the results

• Explain relevance and implications of results for clinical practice

• Avoiding speculation and overgeneralization• Indicate whether additional studies are required

before the results should be used in usual clinical settings

• Give equal emphasis to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit

Conclusions

Review article structured abstract

1-2 sentences describing the clinical question or issue and its importance in clinical practice or public health

Context

• State the precise primary objective of the review.

• Indicate whether the review emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention

• Include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes that are being reviewed

Objective

• Describe data sources, search strategies, years searched, and other sources of material, such as subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles.

• Methods used for quality assessment and inclusion of identified articles should be explained

Evidence acquisition

• The major findings of the review of the clinical issue or topic should be addressed

• The approach should be evidence-based, objective, and balanced, with the highest quality evidence available receiving the greatest emphasis

Evidence synthesis

• The conclusions should• clearly answer the questions posed if

applicable• be based on available evidence• emphasize how clinicians should apply

current knowledge

Conclusions

• Up to date and selective

– limit refs to 30

– Select only the most relevant and most recent papers

• Accurately support the statements made

– Introduction (background literature)

– Methods (previously reported techniques, laboratory methods, statistical tests, classifications…)

– Discussion (support to the interpretation of results)

• Your reviewer knows the literature

– If the refs are incomplete and inaccurate will make the reviewer wonder about other sloppy details in the paper

The Bibliography

• Indicate each reference with a number and write down the final list at the very end of the drafting

• Use the proper format suggested by the journal for articles, book chapters, online publications, etc…

• To avoid mistakes and save time use reference management softwares such as EndNote, Reference Manager or ProCite (automatic numbering and format according to the jounal’s rules)

The Bibliography