IJSPT How To Write A Scientific Article PDF

INVITED COMMENTARY IJSPT HOW TO WRITE A SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE Barbara J. Hoogenboom, PT, EdD, SCS, ATC1 Robert C. Manske, PT, DPT, SCS, ATC2 ABSTRACT Successful production of a written product for submission to a peer-reviewed scientific journal r...

INVITED COMMENTARY IJSPT HOW TO WRITE A SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE Barbara J. Hoogenboom, PT, EdD, SCS, ATC1 Robert C. Manske, PT, DPT, SCS, ATC2 ABSTRACT Successful production of a written product for submission to a peer-reviewed scientific journal requires sub- stantial effort. Such an effort can be maximized by following a few simple suggestions when composing/ creating the product for submission. By following some suggested guidelines and avoiding common errors, the process can be streamlined and success realized for even beginning/novice authors as they negotiate the publication process. The purpose of this invited commentary is to offer practical suggestions for achieving success when writing and submitting manuscripts to The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy and other professional journals. Key words: Journal submission, scientific writing, strategies and tips CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Barb Hoogenboom, PT, EdD, SCS, ATC Grand Valley State University, Cook-DeVos Center for Health Sciences, Room 266 301 Michigan NE Grand Rapids, MI, USA Phone: 616-331-2695 1 Grand Valley State University, Grand Rapids, MI, USA Fax: 616-331 5654 2 University of Wichita, Wichita, KS, USA [email protected] The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy | Volume 7, Number 5 | October 2012 | Page 512 INTRODUCTION sports physical therapy. Failure to publish important findings significantly diminishes the potential impact “The whole of science is nothing more that those findings may have on clinical practice.9 than a refinement of everyday thinking” Albert Einstein BASICS OF MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION Conducting scientific and clinical research is only & GENERAL WRITING TIPS the beginning of the scholarship of discovery. In To begin it might be interesting to learn why review- order for the results of research to be accessible to ers accept manuscripts! Reviewers consider the fol- other professionals and have a potential effect on lowing five criteria to be the most important in the greater scientific community, it must be written decisions about whether to accept manuscripts for and published. Most clinical and scientific discovery publication: 1) the importance, timeliness, relevance, is published in peer-reviewed journals, which are and prevalence of the problem addressed; 2) the those that utilize a process by which an author’s quality of the writing style (i.e., that it is well-written, peers, or experts in the content area, evaluate the clear, straightforward, easy to follow, and logical); 3) manuscript. Following this review the manuscript is the study design applied (i.e., that the design was recommended for publication, revision or rejection. appropriate, rigorous, and comprehensive); 4) the It is the rigor of this review process that makes scien- degree to which the literature review was thoughtful, tific journals the primary source of new information focused, and up-to-date; and 5) the use of a suffi- that impacts clinical decision-making and practice.1,2 ciently large sample.10 For these statements to be true there are also reasons that reviewers reject manu- The task of writing a scientific paper and submitting scripts. The following are the top five reasons for it to a journal for publication is a time-consuming rejecting papers: 1) inappropriate, incomplete, or and often daunting task.3,4 Barriers to effective writ- insufficiently described statistics; 2) over-interpreta- ing include lack of experience, poor writing habits, tion of results; 3) use of inappropriate, suboptimal, or writing anxiety, unfamiliarity with the requirements insufficiently described populations or instruments; of scholarly writing, lack of confidence in writing 4) small or biased samples; and 5) text that is poorly ability, fear of failure, and resistance to feedback.5 written or difficult to follow.10,11 With these reasons However, the very process of writing can be a help- for acceptance or rejection in mind, it is time to ful tool for promoting the process of scientific think- review basics and general writing tips to be used ing,6,7 and effective writing skills allow professionals when performing manuscript preparation. to participate in broader scientific conversations. Furthermore, peer review manuscript publication “Begin with the end in mind”. When you begin writ- systems requiring these technical writing skills can ing about your research, begin with a specific target be developed and improved with practice.8 Having journal in mind.12 Every scientific journal should an understanding of the process and structure used have specific lists of manuscript categories that are to produce a peer-reviewed publication will surely preferred for their readership. The IJSPT seeks to improve the likelihood that a submitted manuscript provide readership with current information to will result in a successful publication. enhance the practice of sports physical therapy. Therefore the manuscript categories accepted by Clear communication of the findings of research is IJSPT include: Original research; Systematic reviews essential to the growth and development of science3 of literature; Clinical commentary and Current con- and professional practice. The culmination of the pub- cept reviews; Case reports; Clinical suggestions and lication process provides not only satisfaction for the unique practice techniques; and Technical notes. researcher and protection of intellectual property, but Once a decision has been made to write a manu- also the important function of dissemination of research script, compose an outline that complies with the results, new ideas, and alternate thought; which ulti- requirements of the target submission journal and mately facilitates scholarly discourse. In short, publica- has each of the suggested sections. This means care- tion of scientific papers is one way to advance fully checking the submission criteria and preparing evidence-based practice in many disciplines, including your paper in the exact format of the journal to which The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy | Volume 7, Number 5 | October 2012 | Page 513 you intend to submit. Be thoughtful about the dis- tense, and spelling are often a cause of rejection by tinction between content (what you are reporting) reviewers. Despite the content of the study these and structure (where it goes in the manuscript). Poor easily fixed errors suggest that the authors created placement of content confuses the reader (reviewer) the manuscript with less thought leading reviewers and may cause misinterpretation of content.3,5 to think that the manuscript may also potentially have erroneous findings as well. A review from a It may be helpful to follow the IMRaD format for writing second set of trained eyes will often catch these scientific manuscripts. This acronym stands for the sec- errors missed by the original authors. If English is tions contained within the article: Introduction, Meth- not your first language, the editorial staff at IJSPT ods, Results, and Discussion. Each of these areas of the suggests that you consult with someone with the rel- manuscript will be addressed in this commentary. evant expertise to give you guidance on English writ- Many accomplished authors write their results first, ing conventions, verb tense, and grammar. Excellent followed by an introduction and discussion, in an writing in English is hard, even for those of us for attempt to “stay true” to their results and not stray whom it is our first language! into additional areas. Typically the last two portions Use figures and graphics to your advantage. to be written are the conclusion and the abstract. Consider the use of graphic/figure representation of The ability to accurately describe ideas, protocols/ data and important procedures or exercises. Tables procedures, and outcomes are the pillars of scien- should be able to stand alone and be completely tific writing. Accurate and clear expression of your understandable at a quick glance. Understanding a thoughts and research information should be the table should not require careful review of the manu- primary goal of scientific writing.12 Remember that script! Figures dramatically enhance the graphic accuracy and clarity are even more important when appeal of a scientific paper. Many formats for graphic trying to get complicated ideas across. Contain your presentation are acceptable, including graphs, charts, literature review, ideas, and discussions to your tables, and pictures or videos. Photographs should be topic, theme, model, review, commentary, or case. clear, free of clutter or extraneous background distrac- Avoid vague terminology and too much prose. Use tions and be taken with models wearing simple cloth- short rather than long sentences. If jargon has to be ing. Color photographs are preferred. Digital figures utilized keep it to a minimum and explain the terms (Scans or existing files as well as new photographs) you do use clearly.13 must be at least 300dpi. All photographs should be pro- vided as separate files (jpeg or tif preferred) and not be Write with a measure of formality, using scientific embedded in the paper. Quality and clarity of figures language and avoiding conjunctions, slang, and dis- are essential for reproduction purposes and should be cipline or regionally specific nomenclature or terms considered before taking images for the manuscript. (e.g. exercise nicknames). For example, replace the term “Monster walks” with “closed-chain hip abduc- A video of an exercise or procedure speaks a thou- tion with elastic resistance around the thighs”. You sand words. Please consider using short video clips as may later refer to the exercise as “also known as descriptive additions to your paper. They will be Monster walks” if you desire. placed on the IJSPT website and accompany your paper. The video clips must be submitted in MPEG-1, Avoid first person language and instead write using MPEG-2, Quicktime (.mov), or Audio/Video Interface third person language. Some journals do not ascribe (.avi) formats. Maximum cumulative length of videos to this requirement, and allow first person refer- is 5 minutes. Each video segment may not exceed 50 ences, however, IJSPT prefers use of third person. MB, and each video clip must be saved as a separate For example, replace “We determined that…” with file and clearly identified. Formulate descriptive fig- “The authors determined that….”. ure/video and Table/chart/graph titles and place For novice writers, it is really helpful to seek a read- them on a figure legend document. Carefully con- ing mentor that will help you pre-read your submis- sider placement of, naming of, and location of figures. sion. Problems such as improper use of grammar, It makes the job of the editors much easier! The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy | Volume 7, Number 5 | October 2012 | Page 514 Avoid Plagiarism and inadvertent lack of citations. information gap in the available literature associated Finally, use citations to your benefit. Cite frequently in with the topic, 3) a literature review in support of order to avoid any plagiarism. The bottom line: If it is not the key questions, 4) subsequently developed pur- your original idea, give credit where credit is due. When poses/objectives and hypotheses.9 using direct quotations, provide not only the number of When constructing a review of the literature, be atten- the citation, but the page where the quote was found. All tive to “sticking“ or “staying true” to your topic at citations should appear in text as a superscripted num- hand. Don’t reach or include too broad of a literature ber followed by punctuation. It is the authors’ responsi- review. For example, do not include extraneous infor- bility to fully ensure all references are cited in completed mation about performance or prevention if your form, in an accurate location. Please carefully follow the research does not actually address those things. The instructions for citations and check that all references in literature review of a scientific paper is not an exhaus- your reference list are cited in the paper and that all cita- tive review of all available knowledge in a given field tions in the paper appear correctly in the reference list. of study. That type of thorough review should be left Please go to IJSPT submission guidelines for full infor- to review articles or textbook chapters. Throughout mation on the format for citations. the introduction (and later in the discussion!) remind yourself that a paper, existing evidence, or results of a CONTENT paper cannot draw conclusions, demonstrate, Abstract describe, or make judgments, only PEOPLE (authors) Sometimes written as an afterthought, the abstract is can. “The evidence demonstrates that” should be of extreme importance as in many instances this sec- stated, “Smith and Jones, demonstrated that….” tion is what is initially previewed by readership to Conclude your introduction with a solid statement of determine if the remainder of the article is worth read- your purpose(s) and your hypothesis(es), as appropri- ing. This is the authors opportunity to draw the reader ate. The purpose and objectives should clearly relate into the study and entice them to read the rest of the to the information gap associated with the given man- article. The abstract is a summary of the article or uscript topic discussed earlier in the introduction sec- study written in 3rd person allowing the readers to get tion. This may seem repetitive, but it actually is helpful a quick glance of what the contents of the article to ensure the reader clearly sees the evolution, impor- include. Writing an abstract is rather challenging as tance, and critical aspects of the study at hand See being brief, accurate and concise are requisite. The Table 1 for examples of well-stated purposes. headings and structure for an abstract are usually pro- vided in the instructions for authors. In some instances, Methods the abstract may change slightly pending content revi- The methods section should clearly describe the spe- sions required during the peer review process. There- cific design of the study and provide clear and concise fore it often works well to complete this portion of the description of the procedures that were performed. manuscript last. Remember the abstract should be able The purpose of sufficient detail in the methods sec- to stand alone and should be as succinct as possible.14 tion is so that an appropriately trained person would be able to replicate your experiments.15 There should Introduction and Review of Literature be complete transparency when describing the study. The introduction is one of the more difficult por- To assist in writing and manuscript preparation there tions of the manuscript to write. Past studies are are several checklists or guidelines that are available used to set the stage or provide the reader with infor- on the IJSPT website. The CONSORT guidelines can be mation regarding the necessity of the represented used when developing and reporting a randomized con- project. For an introduction to work properly, the trolled trial.16 The STARD checklist was developed for reader must feel that the research question is clear, designing a diagnostic accuracy study.17 The PRISMA concise, and worthy of study. checklist was developed for use when performing a A competent introduction should include at least meta-analyses or systematic review.18 A clear methods four key concepts: 1) significance of the topic, 2) the section should contain the following information: 1) The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy | Volume 7, Number 5 | October 2012 | Page 515  Table 1. Examples of well-stated purposes by submission type. the population and equipment used in the study, 2) discussed in the methods section, as they have an how the population and equipment were prepared entire section of their own! and what was done during the study, 3) the protocol Most scientific journals support the need for all proj- used, 4) the outcomes and how they were measured, ects involving humans or animals to have up-to-date 5) the methods used for data analysis. Initially a brief documentation of ethical approval.20 The methods paragraph should explain the overall procedures and section should include a clear statement that the study design. Within this first paragraph there is gen- researchers have obtained approval from an appro- erally a description of inclusion and exclusion criteria priate institutional review board. which help the reader understand the population used. Paragraphs that follow should describe in more Results, Discussion, and Conclusions detail the procedures followed for the study. A clear In most journals the results section is separate from the description of how data was gathered is also helpful. discussion section. It is important that you clearly dis- For example were data gathered prospectively or ret- tinguish your results from your discussion. The results rospectively? Who if anyone was blinded, and where section should describe the results only. The discussion and when was the actual data collected? section should put those results into a broader context. Report your results neutrally, as you “found them”. Although it is a good idea for the authors to have justifica- Again, be thoughtful about content and structure. Think tion and a rationale for their procedures, these should be carefully about where content is placed in the overall saved for inclusion into the discussion section, not to be structure of your paper. It is not appropriate to bring up discussed in the methods section. However, occasionally additional results, not discussed in the results section, studies supporting components of the methods section in the discussion. All results must first be described/pre- such as reliability of tests, or validation of outcome mea- sented and then discussed. Thus, the discussion should sures may be included in the methods section. not simply be a repeat of the results section. Carefully dis- The final portion of the methods section will include cuss where your information is similar or different from the statistical methods used to analyze the data.19 other published evidence and why this might be so. What This does not mean that the actual results should be was different in methods or analysis, what was similar? The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy | Volume 7, Number 5 | October 2012 | Page 516 As previously stated, stick to your topic at hand, and 3. Shah J, Shah A, Pietrobon R. Scientific writing of novice do not overstretch your discussion! One of the major researchers: What difficulties and encouragements do pitfalls in writing the discussion section is overstat- they encounter? Acad Med. 2009;84(4):511-516. ing the significance of your findings4 or making very 4. Cetin S, Hackam DJ. An approach to the writing of a scientific manscript. J Surg Res. 2005;128:165-167. strong statements. For example, it is better to say: 5. Witt PA. Writing for publication: Rationale, process, “Findings of the current study support….” or “these and pitfalls. J Park Recreation Admin. 1995;13:1-9. findings suggest…” than, “Findings of the current 6. Keys CW. Revitalizing instruction in scientific study prove that…” or “this means that….”. Maintain genres: Connecting knowledge production with a sense of humbleness, as nothing is without ques- writing to learn in science. Sci Educ. 1999;83:115-130. tion in the outcomes of any type of research, in any 7. Gopen G, Swan J. The science of scientific writing. discipline! Use words like “possibly”, “likely” or “sug- Am Sci. 1990;78:550-558. gests” to soften findings.12 8. Newell R. Writing academic papers: A guide for prospective authors. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. Do not discuss extraneous ideas, concepts, or infor- 2001;17:110-116. mation not covered by your topic/paper/commen- 9. Cook C, Brismee JM, Courtney C, Hancock M, May tary. Be sure to carefully address all relevant results, S. Publishing a scientific manuscript on manual not just the statistically significant ones or the ones therapy. J Man Manip Ther. 2009;17(3):141-147. that support your hypotheses. When you must resort 10. Bordage G, Reasons reviewers reject and accept to speculation or opinion, be certain to state that up manuscripts: The strengths and weaknesses in front using phrases such as “we therefore speculate” medical education reports. Acad Med. 2001;76:889-896. or “in the authors’ opinion”. 11. Pierson DJ. The top 10 reasons why manuscripts are not accepted for publication. Respir Care. Remember, just as in the introduction and literature 2004;49:1246-12512. review, evidence or results cannot draw conclusions, 12. Eriksson P, Altermann W, Catuneanu O. Editorial: just as previously stated, only people, scientists, Some general advice for writing a scientific paper. researchers, and authors can! J African Earth Sci. 2005;41:285-288. 13. Scientific writing 101. Editorial. Nature Structural Finish with a concise, 3-5 sentence conclusion para- Molecular Bio. 2010;17(2):139. graph. This is not just a restatement of your results, 14. Moreira A, Haahtela T. How to write a scientific rather is comprised of some final, summative state- paper-and win the game scientists play! Pneumologia. ments that reflect the flow and outcomes of the entire 2011;17(3):146-149. paper. Do not include speculative statements or addi- 15. Lin P, Kuo Y. A guide to write a scientific paper for tional material; however, based upon your findings a new writers. Microsurgery. 2012;32:80-85. statement about potential changes in clinical practice 16. Moher D, Schultz KR< Altman DG. CONSORT or future research opportunities can be provided here. GROUP (Consolidatied Standards of Reporting Trials). The CONSORT statement: Revised CONCLUSIONS recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized controlled Writing for publication can be a challenging yet sat- trials. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:657-662. isfying endeavor. The ability to examine, relate, and 17. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards interlink evidence, as well as to provide a peer- complete and accurate reporting of studies of reviewed, disseminated product of your research diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Ann Int labors can be rewarding. A few suggestions have Med. 2003;138:40-44. been offered in this commentary that may assist the 18. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. The novice or the developing writer to attempt, polish, PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for and perfect their approach to scholarly writing. systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6(6): e1000097.doi:10.1371/ REFERENCES journal.pmed1000097. 1. Nahata MC. Tips for writing and publishing an 19. Van Way CW. Writing a scientific paper. Nutr Clin article. Ann Pharmaco. 2008;42:273-277. Pract. 2007; 22:636-640. 2. Dixon N. Writing for publication: A guide for new 20. Kallet RH. How to write the methods section of a authors. Int J Qual Health Care. 2001;13:417-421. research paper. Respir Care. 2004;49:1229-1232. The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy | Volume 7, Number 5 | October 2012 | Page 517