Writing Up the Research Paper for Medical Journals

1. Writing Up the Research Paper for Medical Journals Jeanne M. Ferrante, M.D., M.P.H. Associate Professor Department of Family Medicine

2. You’ve spent months/years conducting your research. Now What? Get It Published!

3. Title • Research question reshaped into the manuscript title • Method of study

4. Abstract OBJECTIVE • Context/Background • Objective • Design • Population/Setting • Intervention (if applicable) • Outcome measures • Analysis • Results • Conclusion METHODS

5. Introduction • Importance of this paper • Gap this paper is addressing • Background information • Follow-up study • Conceptual model/theoretical framework • Purpose • Research question • Hypothesis

6. Methods • Overall research study design • Statement of IRB and informed consent • Intervention, if applicable • Population and Setting • How were data collected and obtained? • Validity • Reliability

7. Methods • Alteration of data to facilitate analysis • Variables • Main and secondary outcomes, independent variables, confounders • Statistical Analysis • Missing data, lost to follow-up • Power calculation for null studies

8. Results Description of study population and setting Descriptive statistics (frequencies, means) Bivariate analysis results Multivariate analysis results Results presented in text OR tables Objective findings without commentary

9. Methods/Results of Qualitative Research Papers • Study Design • Participants and setting • Sampling and sample size • Data collection • Rationale for methodological choice • Theoretical background • Data collection and analysis iterative? • How was data processed?

10. Qualitative Research Papers • How was bias managed ? • Interpretivist vs. realist perspective • What procedures were used to reduce, compare or contrast data? • Descriptions of outliers or negative evidence • Themes organized to produce higher-order insights

11. Qualitative Research Papers Strategies used to draw and verify conclusions Processes used to establish validity and reliability of analysis (interpretivist vs. realist perspective) Enough direct quotations but not too much; avoid very short quotations.

12. Interpretivist Versus Realist Cohen and Crabtree (2008). Evaluative Criteria for Qualitative Research in Health Care. Controversies and Recommendations. Ann Fam Med; 6:331-339. • Interpretivist • Multiple ways to understand reality • Provide meaningful account • Rich substance and content • Description of interpretive process • Immersion and self-reflection • Strong evidence of inference and conclusions

13. Interpretivist Versus Realist Cohen and Crabtree (2008). Evaluative Criteria for Qualitative Research in Health Care. Controversies and Recommendations. Ann Fam Med; 6:331-339. • Realist • Knowledge of reality is imperfect • Strives for plausibility and accuracy • Processes used to repeat and affirm observations • Validity and Reliability • Triangulation, external auditing, multiple coding, member checking

14. Discussion Summarize main findings Highlight study’s particular strengths Explain findings Compare findings with previous work Suggest implications of findings Suggest future directions

15. Discussion • Limitations • External validity- population and setting • Internal validity- limitations in quantity or quality of data, potential confounding, biases, imprecision • Limitations of study design • Effect of limitations on results • Summary paragraph

16. References Usually 10-30 Current Places study in appropriate context

17. Tables/Figures Clear and able to stand alone Footnotes used for explanation Has good use of space Use to decrease text

18. Cover Letter to Editor Title and journal Importance of this research Has not been submitted or published elsewhere Seen and approved by all authors and take public responsibility Conflict of interest statement Funding of research Your contact information

19. Choosing the Right Journal What is your audience? Refer to journals where articles from your literature review were published. Look at articles in your targeted journal. Look at citation index (ISI Journal Citation Reports) for impact factor.

20. Other Tips Proof read! Make sure writing is clear and concise. Look at similar articles in your topic or method for outline. Use Endnote or other bibliography software.

21. Reasons Manuscripts are Accepted Literature review thoughtful, focused, up-to-date Problem important, timely, relevant, critical Problem well formulated, well stated Study well-designed Sample size sufficiently large Interpretation took into account the limitations of the study Implications practical, useful

22. Reasons Manuscripts are Rejected Literature review incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated Problem statement insufficient Conceptual model/theoretical framework missing Measures inappropriate or sub-optimal Sample too small or biased

23. Reasons Manuscripts are Rejected Statistics incomplete or inappropriate Data reported insufficient, inaccurate, or inconsistent Tables or figures defective Results are over interpreted Text difficult to follow

24. Responding to Reviewers Address by reviewer Number and address all comments Repeat the comment, or a portion of it, and set it apart from the response by formatting or change in font (e.g., italics) Include page and paragraph numbers OK to refer to previous responses Be gracious, even if the reviewer was not Resubmit within 1-2 months

25. Guidelines for Different Studies Randomized controlled trials: CONSORT Observational studies: STROBE Non-randomized educational, behavioral, and public health interventions: TREND Quality improvement interventions: SQUIRE Accuracy and use of diagnostic tests: STARD

26. Keep Writing!