Source: S. Unchern, 1998

1. Source: S. Unchern, 1998

2. Science communications: Publishing Scientific Paper • Research is not been completed until the results have been published. • “You don’t write because you want to say something, you write because you have something to say.” • Turning ideas and concepts into a finished product. • Research an interesting question.

3. Steps in Writing Preparing to write • Having a good idea and important topic. • Deciding whether there needs to be a co-author (e.g. mentor). • Knowing the audience (readers) to aim the writing style and depth of information. • Focus on your novel and useful ideas.

4. Source: S. Unchern, 1998

5. Steps in Writing • knowing the requirement of the publisher: format and uniform requirements for manuscript • reviewing what has been done in the past, i.e., literature review and evaluation • Accumulate enough data for well developed story

6. General Rules of Writing The goal is to prepare the document that is clear, concise, complete, and correct. • literature, material collection, review, and evaluation to have information as a raw material to write • organize information before starting to write • outline the sub-topics

7. General Rules of Writing • put yourself in the reader's position • use proper grammar and spelling • make document looks professional • keep things simple, clear, and direct

8. General Rules of Writing • cite references wherever appropriate • get all information down on paper • revise (by yourself or others) • edit, edit, and edit

9. Specific Document Sections: Introduction Tells background information, purpose of the article, description of what the remainder is to cover. Demonstrate that the article is interesting and important. • Background information (sufficient, important, and ethical) • Clear study objectives • Research & Null hypothesis • Institutional Review Board approval

10. Specific Document Sections: Body Contains all details, i.e., in research article, it may be divided into the methods, results, and discussion. Sub-topics should be appropriate and logical. Get to the point where you want reader to have. Put things on your own words (don't quote them from the references). Use tables, figures and other types of illustrations, if necessary. May include: materials & Methods, Results, Discussion.

11. Materials & Methods Appropriate study design Inclusion & Exclusion criteria for subjects (reflected an appropriate study population with representative of the needs) Sample size (enough to prove differences) & Power of test Appropriate controls (Placebo, active drug, historic) Outcome variables (Relevant, Clearly defined, Clinically & biologically significant) Methodology described in detail (appropriate time interval, method of validation) Randomization (appropriate methods, Did all groups have similar demographics?) Blinding Appropriate data collection -Scientific misconduct case Drug, patient, and investigator compliance methods of determination (practically)Appropriate statistics

12. Results Data presentation -Clear and understandable -Format not deceiving -Adequate completeness Exact p-value, confidence intervals reported Validity Ability to generalize results to patients in clinical practice -Statistical significance -Clinical significance Figures, Tables, Appendices -When necessary -To clarify, not to duplicate

13. Discussion & Conclusion • Discussion • Comparison of the study to systematic review to previously published data • Conclusion Summarize information consistent with the body. • Study conclusions are consistent with and supported by results

14. Specific Document Sections • Additional sections • Abstract: in the first page, necessary for research articles - serve as an overall picture of the article. • Includes brief purpose, methods, results and finding, and major conclusion and recommendation. • List of references following the conclusion section • Appendices

15. Source: S. Unchern, 1998

16. Sources: • D.R. Homes et al. 2009. Manuscript preparation and publication. Circulation,120: 906-913. • J.C. Kiefer. 2010. Scientific communications: Publishing a scientific paper. Development Dynamics. 239: 723-726. • J.C. Overholser. 2011. Reading, writing, and reviewing: Recommendations for scholarly manuscripts at the graduate and professional level. J Contemp Psychother, 41: 115-122. • R.A. Audisio et al. 2009. Successful publishing: How to get your paper accepted. Surgical Oncology, 18: 350-356. • P.M. Malone, Professional Writing. In: P.M. Malone, K.W. Mosdell, K.L. Kier, and J.E. Stanovish, eds. Drug information: A guide for pharmacists, Appleton&Lange, Stamford, CT., 1996. pp. 151-165. • Surachai Unchern, Evaluation of Research Report, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, 1998.