On the other hand, manuscript writing process should begin before the completion of the study (even the during project stage). If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results. Begin by briefly re-stating the research problem you were investigating and answer all of the research questions underpinning the problem that you posed in the introduction. I have concisely summarized the most important findings. The previous studies can be an explanation or reinforcement of your findings. endobj For intermediate paragraphs, a divide and conquer approach, meaning a full paragraph describing each of the study endpoints, can be used. This can be followed by any recommendations for further research. 3) Is it suitable for the publication in the selected journal? No study is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to other previously published research. In this paragraph, main topic should be emphasized without going into much detail. October 13, 2020. However, generally, before onset of the writing process of the manuscript, its abstract might be already presented in various congresses. Recommendations: what practical actions or scientific studies should follow? will also be available for a limited time. When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations for the study results, rather than just those that fit your prior assumptions or biases. Since they are unrelated both to the author(s), and subject matter of the manuscript, these referees can review our manuscript more objectively. Systematically explain the meaning of the findings and why you believe they are important. I. The aim of the present review is to outline the main aspects of writing the discussion section of a manuscript. These tables can be written down in the Results section. Limitations might be due to your overall research design, specific methodological choices, or unanticipated obstacles that emerged during the research process. 0@FGcGQo3SOwop[9`SI*lSh(6Yn\ fQ Before submission of the manuscript to the target journal the opinions of internal, and external referees should be taken.
No one has thought as long and hard about your study as you have. Accordingly, the findings of the study are determined in order of their importance, and a paragraph is constructed for each finding (Figure 1). Following receival of the opinions of internal, and external referees, one should concentrate priorly on indicated problems, and their solutions. sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal Besides, asking the following questions, and searching their answers in the same paragraph will facilitate writing process of the paragraph. If so, what do they add to it? 2) Why is it false? 14 0 obj During this incubation period where the comments of the internal, and external referees are awaited, literature should be reviewed once more. I have cited relevant literature to show how my results fit in. There are a few common mistakes to avoid when writing the discussion section of your dissertation. It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. The discussion section should relate your study findings to those of other studies, particularly if questions raised by previous studies served as the motivation for your study, the findings of other studies support your findings [which strengthens the importance of your study results], and/or they point out how your study differs from other similar studies. Moreover, some unanswered questions may have become more focused because of your study. Generally the length of the Discussion section should not exceed the sum of other sections (ntroduction, material and methods, and results), and it should be completed within 67 paragraphs.. Each paragraph should not contain more than 200 words, and hence words should be counted repeteadly. <> stream Instead of Measurements were performed to evaluate the levels of CEA in the serum use We measured serum CEA levels, National Library of Medicine For example an article bearing the title Use of barbed sutures in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy shortens warm ischemia time should not be sent to Original Investigations and Seminars in Urologic Oncology Indeed the topic of the manuscript is out of the agenda of this journal. The You should make suggestions for further research in the discussion section. These are the general rules you should adopt when composing your discussion of the results: The content of the discussion section of your paper most often includes: Keep the following sequential points in mind as you organize and write the discussion section of your paper: The objectives of your discussion section should include the following: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. 2). The meaning of the results might seem obvious to you, but its important to spell out their significance for the reader and show exactly how they answer your research questions. External referees are our colleagues who did not contribute to data collection of our study in any way, but we can request their opinions about the subject matter of the manuscript. Tompson A. On the other hand references should be promptly put in place while writing the manuscript, Sorting, and placement of the references should not be left to the last moment. Abstracts should not be referred, and review articles should not be cited unless required very much. Start this chapter by reiterating your research problemand concisely summarizing your major findings. These results build on existing evidence of, The results do not fit with the theory that, The experiment provides a new insight into the relationship between, These results should be taken into account when considering how to, The data contributes a clearer understanding of, The generalizability of the results is limited by, The methodological choices were constrained by, Further research is needed to establish. our senior colleagues more experienced than us). The Writing Center. Although your study may offer important insights about the research problem, other questions related to the problem likely remain unanswered. If a study that you cited disagrees with your findings, don't ignore it--clearly explain why the study's findings differ from yours. Fourteen Steps to Writing to Writing an Effective Discussion Section. However writing manuscripts is a challenging endeavour in that we physicians have a heavy workload, and English which is common language used for the dissemination of scientific knowledge is not our mother tongue. Frequently asked questions about the discussion. <> 4) Has a simple, clear, and effective language been used throughout the manuscript? A few historical references may be helpful for perspective but most of the references should be relatively recent and included to aid in the interpretation of your results and/or linked to similar studies. Writing manuscripts to describe study outcomes, although not easy, is the main task of an academician. The discussion section is where you explore the underlying meaning of your research, its possible implications in other areas of study, and the possible improvements that can be made in order to further develop the concerns of your research. Briefly reiterate for your readers the research problem or problems you are investigating and the methods you used to investigate them, then move quickly to describe the major findings of the study. Remember that the data are the data: nothing more, nothing less. As is the case with the whole article, text of the Discussion section should be written with a simple language, as if we are talking with our colleague. Discuss: The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. During writing process, this abstract might be a useful guide which prevents deviation from the main objective of the manuscript. will determine task sharing, and make a favourable contribution to the perfection of the manuscript. Comments coming from the reviewers should be criticized, but a defensive attitude should not be assumed during this evaluation process. Indeed young colleagues have the enthusiasm, and energy required for the conduction of the study, while middle-aged researchers have the knowledge to manage the research, and manuscript writing. After reading the discussion section, you want the reader to think about the results [why hadnt I thought of that?]. Do your results agree with previous research? Before concluding the discussion, identify potential limitations and weaknesses. Occasionally, the results and discussion will be combined into one chapter. [3] While referring these studies, (excl. Experienced researchers make guiding contributions to the manuscript. If appropriate, the discussion section is also where you state how the findings from your study revealed new gaps in the literature that had not been previously exposed or adequately described. However the suitability of the title to the agenda of the target journal should be investigated beforehand. One of them is to allocate at least 30 minutes a day for writing a manuscript which amounts to 3.5 hours a week. During writing process of the manuscript one of these can be selected based on the intensity of the discussion. Fourteen Steps to Writing to Writing an Effective Discussion Section. In: Murray R, editor. [1] 1) Can the discussed result be false or inadequate? During this procedure, inevitably some issues which concerns general concept of manuscript writing process are dealt with. The most optimal approach to manuscript writing process is daily writing strategy where higher levels of motivation are persistently maintained. This paragraph should begin with a description of the unexpected finding, followed by a brief interpretation as to why you believe it appeared and, if necessary, its possible significance in relation to the overall study. If appropriate, refer the reader to a figure or table to help enhance the interpretation of the data. University of Toronto; Summary: Using it Wisely. Each paragraph begins with an indisputable introductory sentence about the topic to be discussed. American Psychological Association gradPSYCH Magazine (January 2006). It is important to remember that the purpose of research is to discover and not to prove. Generally, after completion of the study, it is very difficult to solve the problems which might be discerned during the writing process. Accessibility should be used instead of white in color, definitely proven, past history, and in order to, respectively (ref. Additionally, we address various issues regarding manuscripts in general. On the other hand, we think that research team consisting of different age groups has some advantages. The discussion section should remain focused on the findings of your study. The Structure, Format, Content, and Style of a Journal-Style Scientific Paper. University College Writing Centre. Especially before writing the manuscript, the most important step at the start is to construct a draft, and completion of the manuscript on a theoretical basis.
Subsequently, in the light of the current literature this finding is discussed, new ideas on this subject are revealed, and the paragraph ends with a concluding remark. <> This part of the paper is not strictly governed by objective reporting of information but, rather, it is where you can engage in creative thinking about issues through evidence-based interpretation of findings. HHS Vulnerability Disclosure, Help However, do not offer recommendations which could have been easily addressed within the study. In fact editors of the journal will not reserve the limited space in their journal for articles yielding similar conclusions. This demonstrates to the reader you have inadequately examined and interpreted the data. PMC legacy view For the placement of references use of software programs detailed in other sections is a rational approach. government site. You can also begin by highlighting the most significant or unexpected results. The .gov means its official. Indeed during this time interval a new article which you should consider in the Discussion section can be cited in the literature. The sequencing of providing this information is important; first state the answer, then the relevant results, then cite the work of others. It is far better for you to identify and acknowledge your studys limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor! from past to present, from a few to many cases), and aspects of the study contradictory to other studies should be underlined. II. Analyzing vs. Summarizing. You should only mention limitations that are directly relevant to your research objectives, and evaluate how much impact they had on achieving the aims of the research. Therefore, be careful that you do not read more into the findings than can be supported by the evidence you've gathered. 
However, in parallel with academic development, our novice colleague manuscripters can prefer collectioners approach.. The introductory paragraph contains the main idea of performing the study in question. On the other hand in the last paragraph, future directions or potential clinical applications may be emphasized. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. In line with the opinions of the referees, the manuscript can be critically reviewed, and perfected.[1]**. Nowadays, articles questioning available information, rather than confirmatory ones attract attention. It is appropriate to review the manuscript for the third time 1 or 2 weeks after completion of its writing process. If there are potential confounding variables that you were unable to control, acknowledge the effect these may have had. George Mason University; One of the most common mistakes that you can make when discussing the results of your study is to present a superficial interpretation of the findings that more or less re-states the results section of your paper.
13 0 obj If you encountered problems when gathering or analyzing data, explain how these influenced the results. Comment on their relative importance in relation to your overall interpretation of the results and, if necessary, note how they may affect the validity of the findings. ; 2) Does it persuasive? If more than one unexpected finding emerged during the study, describe each them in the order they appeared as you gathered the data. You should write a direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results. After noting the limitations, you can reiterate why the results are nonetheless valid for the purpose of answering your research questions. Instead of No instances of either postoperative death or major complications occurred during the early post-operative period use There were no deaths or major complications occurred during the early post-operative period. This is the section where you need to present the importance of your study and how it may be able to contribute to and/or fill existing gaps in the field. This sentence basically can be the answer to the question What have we found? Then a sentence associated with the subject matter to be discussed is written. III. However during this procedure studies should be presented in a logical sequence (ie. x O f Limitations arent about listing your errors, but about providing an accurate picture of what can and cannot be concluded from your study. In conclusion, academic writing is similar to other skills, and practice makes perfect.
Writing in Psychology course syllabus. Daily working requirements unrelated to the manuscript writing might intervene, and prolong manuscript writing process. Whats the difference between results and discussion? z2 w41M=S}_L#\',i>|
c-gkO:jOr&) }
T/1:wQ?w*v:diRkc[CaX~7~#u$__fxX|ZS&0 In the Discussion section divide and conquer tactics remarkably facilitates writing process of the discussion. endobj Sometimes your professor will encourage you to expand the discussion in this way, while others dont care what your opinion is beyond your efforts to interpret the data. Our approach on this subject is to write all structured parts of the manuscript at the same time, and start writing the manuscript while reading the first literature. The discussion chapter is where you delve into the meaning, importance and relevance of your results. z1kbO`/
gG=!. Herein, at least drafts of the Introduction, and Material and Methods can be written, and even tables containing numerical data can be constructed. The form of your interpretations will depend on the type of research, but some typical approaches to interpreting the data include: You can organize your discussion around key themes, hypotheses or research questions, following the same structure as your results section. Describe the generalizability of your results to other situations, if applicable to the method chosen, then describe in detail problems you encountered in the method(s) you used to gather information. One of the important mistakes is refraining from critical review of the manuscript as a whole after completion of the writing process. Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings. It is advisable to work on a manuscript regularly to avoid losing familiarity with the article. The other important mistake is to give too much references, and irrelevancy between the references, and the section with these cited references. Indeed, it might be very difficult to remember relevant references to be placed in the Discussion section. How to write an English medical manuscript that will be published and have impact. On the other hand, relevant or irrelevant feedbacks received from our colleagues can contribute to the perfection of the manuscript. Bethesda, MD 20894, Web Policies [2] Each sentence should indicate a single point, and it should not exceed 2530 words. It is far better for you to identify and acknowledge your studys limitations than to have them pointed out by your professor! 3 0 obj xw@;8(QAiDlQ)rbDE" cE)*j;6,aEn={cwnf;^!BJR:xy^^G)D gjX]ym? Therefore, the authors should go over the manuscript for at least three times after finalization of the manuscript based on joint decision. Avoid using an apologetic tone; however, be honest and self-critical. In conclusion, the major point to remember is that the manuscript should be written complying with principles of simplicity, clarity, and effectiveness. However during this process, classical information should not be questioned except for special circumstances. Cf|~lH$ZS~5nP-Jb%7=kY:]Eljg>|Nzp KZ+3T2,9Wjg>rYh}Xi\S^pNa 
