how to write a scientific for a research paper

Peer Recognized

Make a name in academia

How to Write a Research Paper: the LEAP approach (+cheat sheet)

In this article I will show you how to write a research paper using the four LEAP writing steps. The LEAP academic writing approach is a step-by-step method for turning research results into a published paper .

The LEAP writing approach has been the cornerstone of the 70 + research papers that I have authored and the 3700+ citations these paper have accumulated within 9 years since the completion of my PhD. I hope the LEAP approach will help you just as much as it has helped me to make an real, tangible impact with my research.

What is the LEAP research paper writing approach?

I designed the LEAP writing approach not only for merely writing the papers. My goal with the writing system was to show young scientists how to first think about research results and then how to efficiently write each section of the research paper.

In other words, you will see how to write a research paper by first analyzing the results and then building a logical, persuasive arguments. In this way, instead of being afraid of writing research paper, you will be able to rely on the paper writing process to help you with what is the most demanding task in getting published – thinking.

The four research paper writing steps according to the LEAP approach:

I will show each of these steps in detail. And you will be able to download the LEAP cheat sheet for using with every paper you write.

But before I tell you how to efficiently write a research paper, I want to show you what is the problem with the way scientists typically write a research paper and why the LEAP approach is more efficient.

How scientists typically write a research paper (and why it isn’t efficient)

Writing a research paper can be tough, especially for a young scientist. Your reasoning needs to be persuasive and thorough enough to convince readers of your arguments. The description has to be derived from research evidence, from prior art, and from your own judgment. This is a tough feat to accomplish.

The figure below shows the sequence of the different parts of a typical research paper. Depending on the scientific journal, some sections might be merged or nonexistent, but the general outline of a research paper will remain very similar.

Here is the problem: Most people make the mistake of writing in this same sequence.

While the structure of scientific articles is designed to help the reader follow the research, it does little to help the scientist write the paper. This is because the layout of research articles starts with the broad (introduction) and narrows down to the specifics (results). See in the figure below how the research paper is structured in terms of the breath of information that each section entails.

How to write a research paper according to the LEAP approach

For a scientist, it is much easier to start writing a research paper with laying out the facts in the narrow sections (i.e. results), step back to describe them (i.e. write the discussion), and step back again to explain the broader picture in the introduction.

For example, it might feel intimidating to start writing a research paper by explaining your research’s global significance in the introduction, while it is easy to plot the figures in the results. When plotting the results, there is not much room for wiggle: the results are what they are.

Starting to write a research papers from the results is also more fun because you finally get to see and understand the complete picture of the research that you have worked on.

Most importantly, following the LEAP approach will help you first make sense of the results yourself and then clearly communicate them to the readers. That is because the sequence of writing allows you to slowly understand the meaning of the results and then develop arguments for presenting to your readers.

I have personally been able to write and submit a research article in three short days using this method.

Step 1: Lay Out the Facts

You have worked long hours on a research project that has produced results and are no doubt curious to determine what they exactly mean. There is no better way to do this than by preparing figures, graphics and tables. This is what the first LEAP step is focused on – diving into the results.

How to p repare charts and tables for a research paper

Your first task is to try out different ways of visually demonstrating the research results. In many fields, the central items of a journal paper will be charts that are based on the data generated during research. In other fields, these might be conceptual diagrams, microscopy images, schematics and a number of other types of scientific graphics which should visually communicate the research study and its results to the readers. If you have reasonably small number of data points, data tables might be useful as well.

Tips for preparing charts and tables

• Try multiple chart types but in the finished paper only use the one that best conveys the message you want to present to the readers
• Follow the eight chart design progressions for selecting and refining a data chart for your paper: https://peerrecognized.com/chart-progressions
• Prepare scientific graphics and visualizations for your paper using the scientific graphic design cheat sheet: https://peerrecognized.com/tools-for-creating-scientific-illustrations/

How to describe the results of your research

Now that you have your data charts, graphics and tables laid out in front of you – describe what you see in them. Seek to answer the question: What have I found?  Your statements should progress in a logical sequence and be backed by the visual information. Since, at this point, you are simply explaining what everyone should be able to see for themselves, you can use a declarative tone: The figure X demonstrates that…

Tips for describing the research results :

• Answer the question: “ What have I found? “
• Use declarative tone since you are simply describing observations

Step 2: Explain the results

The core aspect of your research paper is not actually the results; it is the explanation of their meaning. In the second LEAP step, you will do some heavy lifting by guiding the readers through the results using logic backed by previous scientific research.

How to define the Message of a research paper

To define the central message of your research paper, imagine how you would explain your research to a colleague in 20 seconds . If you succeed in effectively communicating your paper’s message, a reader should be able to recount your findings in a similarly concise way even a year after reading it. This clarity will increase the chances that someone uses the knowledge you generated, which in turn raises the likelihood of citations to your research paper. 

Tips for defining the paper’s central message :

• Write the paper’s core message in a single sentence or two bullet points
• Write the core message in the header of the research paper manuscript

How to write the Discussion section of a research paper

In the discussion section you have to demonstrate why your research paper is worthy of publishing. In other words, you must now answer the all-important So what? question . How well you do so will ultimately define the success of your research paper.

Here are three steps to get started with writing the discussion section:

• Write bullet points of the things that convey the central message of the research article (these may evolve into subheadings later on).
• Make a list with the arguments or observations that support each idea.
• Finally, expand on each point to make full sentences and paragraphs.

Tips for writing the discussion section:

• What is the meaning of the results?
• Was the hypothesis confirmed?
• Write bullet points that support the core message
• List logical arguments for each bullet point, group them into sections
• Instead of repeating research timeline, use a presentation sequence that best supports your logic
• Convert arguments to full paragraphs; be confident but do not overhype
• Refer to both supportive and contradicting research papers for maximum credibility

How to write the Conclusions of a research paper

Since some readers might just skim through your research paper and turn directly to the conclusions, it is a good idea to make conclusion a standalone piece. In the first few sentences of the conclusions, briefly summarize the methodology and try to avoid using abbreviations (if you do, explain what they mean).

After this introduction, summarize the findings from the discussion section. Either paragraph style or bullet-point style conclusions can be used. I prefer the bullet-point style because it clearly separates the different conclusions and provides an easy-to-digest overview for the casual browser. It also forces me to be more succinct.

Tips for writing the conclusion section :

• Summarize the key findings, starting with the most important one
• Make conclusions standalone (short summary, avoid abbreviations)
• Add an optional take-home message and suggest future research in the last paragraph

How to refine the Objective of a research paper

The objective is a short, clear statement defining the paper’s research goals. It can be included either in the final paragraph of the introduction, or as a separate subsection after the introduction. Avoid writing long paragraphs with in-depth reasoning, references, and explanation of methodology since these belong in other sections. The paper’s objective can often be written in a single crisp sentence.

Tips for writing the objective section :

• The objective should ask the question that is answered by the central message of the research paper
• The research objective should be clear long before writing a paper. At this point, you are simply refining it to make sure it is addressed in the body of the paper.

How to write the Methodology section of your research paper

When writing the methodology section, aim for a depth of explanation that will allow readers to reproduce the study . This means that if you are using a novel method, you will have to describe it thoroughly. If, on the other hand, you applied a standardized method, or used an approach from another paper, it will be enough to briefly describe it with reference to the detailed original source.

Remember to also detail the research population, mention how you ensured representative sampling, and elaborate on what statistical methods you used to analyze the results.

Tips for writing the methodology section :

• Include enough detail to allow reproducing the research
• Provide references if the methods are known
• Create a methodology flow chart to add clarity
• Describe the research population, sampling methodology, statistical methods for result analysis
• Describe what methodology, test methods, materials, and sample groups were used in the research.

Step 3: Advertize the research

Step 3 of the LEAP writing approach is designed to entice the casual browser into reading your research paper. This advertising can be done with an informative title, an intriguing abstract, as well as a thorough explanation of the underlying need for doing the research within the introduction.

How to write the Introduction of a research paper

The introduction section should leave no doubt in the mind of the reader that what you are doing is important and that this work could push scientific knowledge forward. To do this convincingly, you will need to have a good knowledge of what is state-of-the-art in your field. You also need be able to see the bigger picture in order to demonstrate the potential impacts of your research work.

Think of the introduction as a funnel, going from wide to narrow, as shown in the figure below:

• Start with a brief context to explain what do we already know,
• Follow with the motivation for the research study and explain why should we care about it,
• Explain the research gap you are going to bridge within this research paper,
• Describe the approach you will take to solve the problem.

Tips for writing the introduction section :

• Follow the Context – Motivation – Research gap – Approach funnel for writing the introduction
• Explain how others tried and how you plan to solve the research problem
• Do a thorough literature review before writing the introduction
• Start writing the introduction by using your own words, then add references from the literature

How to prepare the Abstract of a research paper

The abstract acts as your paper’s elevator pitch and is therefore best written only after the main text is finished. In this one short paragraph you must convince someone to take on the time-consuming task of reading your whole research article. So, make the paper easy to read, intriguing, and self-explanatory; avoid jargon and abbreviations.

How to structure the abstract of a research paper:

• The abstract is a single paragraph that follows this structure:
• Problem: why did we research this
• Methodology: typically starts with the words “Here we…” that signal the start of own contribution.
• Results: what we found from the research.
• Conclusions: show why are the findings important

How to compose a research paper Title

The title is the ultimate summary of a research paper. It must therefore entice someone looking for information to click on a link to it and continue reading the article. A title is also used for indexing purposes in scientific databases, so a representative and optimized title will play large role in determining if your research paper appears in search results at all.

Tips for coming up with a research paper title:

• Capture curiosity of potential readers using a clear and descriptive title
• Include broad terms that are often searched
• Add details that uniquely identify the researched subject of your research paper
• Avoid jargon and abbreviations
• Use keywords as title extension (instead of duplicating the words) to increase the chance of appearing in search results

How to prepare Highlights and Graphical Abstract

Highlights are three to five short bullet-point style statements that convey the core findings of the research paper. Notice that the focus is on the findings, not on the process of getting there.

A graphical abstract placed next to the textual abstract visually summarizes the entire research paper in a single, easy-to-follow figure. I show how to create a graphical abstract in my book Research Data Visualization and Scientific Graphics.

Tips for preparing highlights and graphical abstract:

• In highlights show core findings of the research paper (instead of what you did in the study).
• In graphical abstract show take-home message or methodology of the research paper. Learn more about creating a graphical abstract in this article.

Step 4: Prepare for submission

Sometimes it seems that nuclear fusion will stop on the star closest to us (read: the sun will stop to shine) before a submitted manuscript is published in a scientific journal. The publication process routinely takes a long time, and after submitting the manuscript you have very little control over what happens. To increase the chances of a quick publication, you must do your homework before submitting the manuscript. In the fourth LEAP step, you make sure that your research paper is published in the most appropriate journal as quickly and painlessly as possible.

How to select a scientific Journal for your research paper

The best way to find a journal for your research paper is it to review which journals you used while preparing your manuscript. This source listing should provide some assurance that your own research paper, once published, will be among similar articles and, thus, among your field’s trusted sources.

After this initial selection of hand-full of scientific journals, consider the following six parameters for selecting the most appropriate journal for your research paper (read this article to review each step in detail):

• Scope and publishing history
• Ranking and Recognition
• Publishing time
• Acceptance rate
• Content requirements
• Access and Fees

How to select a journal for your research paper:

• Use the six parameters to select the most appropriate scientific journal for your research paper
• Use the following tools for journal selection: https://peerrecognized.com/journals
• Follow the journal’s “Authors guide” formatting requirements

How to Edit you manuscript

No one can write a finished research paper on their first attempt. Before submitting, make sure to take a break from your work for a couple of days, or even weeks. Try not to think about the manuscript during this time. Once it has faded from your memory, it is time to return and edit. The pause will allow you to read the manuscript from a fresh perspective and make edits as necessary.

I have summarized the most useful research paper editing tools in this article.

Tips for editing a research paper:

• Take time away from the research paper to forget about it; then returning to edit,
• Start by editing the content: structure, headings, paragraphs, logic, figures
• Continue by editing the grammar and language; perform a thorough language check using academic writing tools
• Read the entire paper out loud and correct what sounds weird

How to write a compelling Cover Letter for your paper

Begin the cover letter by stating the paper’s title and the type of paper you are submitting (review paper, research paper, short communication). Next, concisely explain why your study was performed, what was done, and what the key findings are. State why the results are important and what impact they might have in the field. Make sure you mention how your approach and findings relate to the scope of the journal in order to show why the article would be of interest to the journal’s readers.

I wrote a separate article that explains what to include in a cover letter here. You can also download a cover letter template from the article.

Tips for writing a cover letter:

• Explain how the findings of your research relate to journal’s scope
• Tell what impact the research results will have
• Show why the research paper will interest the journal’s audience
• Add any legal statements as required in journal’s guide for authors

How to Answer the Reviewers

Reviewers will often ask for new experiments, extended discussion, additional details on the experimental setup, and so forth. In principle, your primary winning tactic will be to agree with the reviewers and follow their suggestions whenever possible. After all, you must earn their blessing in order to get your paper published.

Be sure to answer each review query and stick to the point. In the response to the reviewers document write exactly where in the paper you have made any changes. In the paper itself, highlight the changes using a different color. This way the reviewers are less likely to re-read the entire article and suggest new edits.

In cases when you don’t agree with the reviewers, it makes sense to answer more thoroughly. Reviewers are scientifically minded people and so, with enough logical and supported argument, they will eventually be willing to see things your way.

Tips for answering the reviewers:

• Agree with most review comments, but if you don’t, thoroughly explain why
• Highlight changes in the manuscript
• Do not take the comments personally and cool down before answering

The LEAP research paper writing cheat sheet

Imagine that you are back in grad school and preparing to take an exam on the topic: “How to write a research paper”. As an exemplary student, you would, most naturally, create a cheat sheet summarizing the subject… Well, I did it for you.

This one-page summary of the LEAP research paper writing technique will remind you of the key research paper writing steps. Print it out and stick it to a wall in your office so that you can review it whenever you are writing a new research paper.

Now that we have gone through the four LEAP research paper writing steps, I hope you have a good idea of how to write a research paper. It can be an enjoyable process and once you get the hang of it, the four LEAP writing steps should even help you think about and interpret the research results. This process should enable you to write a well-structured, concise, and compelling research paper.

Have fund with writing your next research paper. I hope it will turn out great!

Learn writing papers that get cited

The LEAP writing approach is a blueprint for writing research papers. But to be efficient and write papers that get cited, you need more than that.

My name is Martins Zaumanis and in my interactive course Research Paper Writing Masterclass I will show you how to  visualize  your research results,  frame a message  that convinces your readers, and write  each section  of the paper. Step-by-step.

And of course – you will learn to respond the infamous  Reviewer No.2.

Hey! My name is Martins Zaumanis and I am a materials scientist in Switzerland ( Google Scholar ). As the first person in my family with a PhD, I have first-hand experience of the challenges starting scientists face in academia. With this blog, I want to help young researchers succeed in academia. I call the blog “Peer Recognized”, because peer recognition is what lifts academic careers and pushes science forward.

Besides this blog, I have written the Peer Recognized book series and created the Peer Recognized Academy offering interactive online courses.

Related articles:

One comment

• Pingback: Research Paper Outline with Key Sentence Skeleton (+Paper Template)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I want to join the Peer Recognized newsletter!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Privacy Overview

Copyright © 2024 Martins Zaumanis

Contacts:  [email protected]  

Privacy Policy 

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal

• Open access
• Published: 30 April 2020
• Volume 36 , pages 909–913, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Clara Busse   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0178-1000 1 &
• Ella August   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5151-1036 1 , 2  

277k Accesses

15 Citations

714 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Communicating research findings is an essential step in the research process. Often, peer-reviewed journals are the forum for such communication, yet many researchers are never taught how to write a publishable scientific paper. In this article, we explain the basic structure of a scientific paper and describe the information that should be included in each section. We also identify common pitfalls for each section and recommend strategies to avoid them. Further, we give advice about target journal selection and authorship. In the online resource 1 , we provide an example of a high-quality scientific paper, with annotations identifying the elements we describe in this article.

Similar content being viewed by others

How to Choose the Right Journal

The Point Is…to Publish?

Writing Skills

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Writing a scientific paper is an important component of the research process, yet researchers often receive little formal training in scientific writing. This is especially true in low-resource settings. In this article, we explain why choosing a target journal is important, give advice about authorship, provide a basic structure for writing each section of a scientific paper, and describe common pitfalls and recommendations for each section. In the online resource 1 , we also include an annotated journal article that identifies the key elements and writing approaches that we detail here. Before you begin your research, make sure you have ethical clearance from all relevant ethical review boards.

Select a Target Journal Early in the Writing Process

We recommend that you select a “target journal” early in the writing process; a “target journal” is the journal to which you plan to submit your paper. Each journal has a set of core readers and you should tailor your writing to this readership. For example, if you plan to submit a manuscript about vaping during pregnancy to a pregnancy-focused journal, you will need to explain what vaping is because readers of this journal may not have a background in this topic. However, if you were to submit that same article to a tobacco journal, you would not need to provide as much background information about vaping.

Information about a journal’s core readership can be found on its website, usually in a section called “About this journal” or something similar. For example, the Journal of Cancer Education presents such information on the “Aims and Scope” page of its website, which can be found here: https://www.springer.com/journal/13187/aims-and-scope .

Peer reviewer guidelines from your target journal are an additional resource that can help you tailor your writing to the journal and provide additional advice about crafting an effective article [ 1 ]. These are not always available, but it is worth a quick web search to find out.

Identify Author Roles Early in the Process

Early in the writing process, identify authors, determine the order of authors, and discuss the responsibilities of each author. Standard author responsibilities have been identified by The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) [ 2 ]. To set clear expectations about each team member’s responsibilities and prevent errors in communication, we also suggest outlining more detailed roles, such as who will draft each section of the manuscript, write the abstract, submit the paper electronically, serve as corresponding author, and write the cover letter. It is best to formalize this agreement in writing after discussing it, circulating the document to the author team for approval. We suggest creating a title page on which all authors are listed in the agreed-upon order. It may be necessary to adjust authorship roles and order during the development of the paper. If a new author order is agreed upon, be sure to update the title page in the manuscript draft.

In the case where multiple papers will result from a single study, authors should discuss who will author each paper. Additionally, authors should agree on a deadline for each paper and the lead author should take responsibility for producing an initial draft by this deadline.

Structure of the Introduction Section

The introduction section should be approximately three to five paragraphs in length. Look at examples from your target journal to decide the appropriate length. This section should include the elements shown in Fig.  1 . Begin with a general context, narrowing to the specific focus of the paper. Include five main elements: why your research is important, what is already known about the topic, the “gap” or what is not yet known about the topic, why it is important to learn the new information that your research adds, and the specific research aim(s) that your paper addresses. Your research aim should address the gap you identified. Be sure to add enough background information to enable readers to understand your study. Table 1 provides common introduction section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

The main elements of the introduction section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Methods Section

The purpose of the methods section is twofold: to explain how the study was done in enough detail to enable its replication and to provide enough contextual detail to enable readers to understand and interpret the results. In general, the essential elements of a methods section are the following: a description of the setting and participants, the study design and timing, the recruitment and sampling, the data collection process, the dataset, the dependent and independent variables, the covariates, the analytic approach for each research objective, and the ethical approval. The hallmark of an exemplary methods section is the justification of why each method was used. Table 2 provides common methods section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Results Section

The focus of the results section should be associations, or lack thereof, rather than statistical tests. Two considerations should guide your writing here. First, the results should present answers to each part of the research aim. Second, return to the methods section to ensure that the analysis and variables for each result have been explained.

Begin the results section by describing the number of participants in the final sample and details such as the number who were approached to participate, the proportion who were eligible and who enrolled, and the number of participants who dropped out. The next part of the results should describe the participant characteristics. After that, you may organize your results by the aim or by putting the most exciting results first. Do not forget to report your non-significant associations. These are still findings.

Tables and figures capture the reader’s attention and efficiently communicate your main findings [ 3 ]. Each table and figure should have a clear message and should complement, rather than repeat, the text. Tables and figures should communicate all salient details necessary for a reader to understand the findings without consulting the text. Include information on comparisons and tests, as well as information about the sample and timing of the study in the title, legend, or in a footnote. Note that figures are often more visually interesting than tables, so if it is feasible to make a figure, make a figure. To avoid confusing the reader, either avoid abbreviations in tables and figures, or define them in a footnote. Note that there should not be citations in the results section and you should not interpret results here. Table 3 provides common results section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Discussion Section

Opposite the introduction section, the discussion should take the form of a right-side-up triangle beginning with interpretation of your results and moving to general implications (Fig.  2 ). This section typically begins with a restatement of the main findings, which can usually be accomplished with a few carefully-crafted sentences.

Major elements of the discussion section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Next, interpret the meaning or explain the significance of your results, lifting the reader’s gaze from the study’s specific findings to more general applications. Then, compare these study findings with other research. Are these findings in agreement or disagreement with those from other studies? Does this study impart additional nuance to well-accepted theories? Situate your findings within the broader context of scientific literature, then explain the pathways or mechanisms that might give rise to, or explain, the results.

Journals vary in their approach to strengths and limitations sections: some are embedded paragraphs within the discussion section, while some mandate separate section headings. Keep in mind that every study has strengths and limitations. Candidly reporting yours helps readers to correctly interpret your research findings.

The next element of the discussion is a summary of the potential impacts and applications of the research. Should these results be used to optimally design an intervention? Does the work have implications for clinical protocols or public policy? These considerations will help the reader to further grasp the possible impacts of the presented work.

Finally, the discussion should conclude with specific suggestions for future work. Here, you have an opportunity to illuminate specific gaps in the literature that compel further study. Avoid the phrase “future research is necessary” because the recommendation is too general to be helpful to readers. Instead, provide substantive and specific recommendations for future studies. Table 4 provides common discussion section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Follow the Journal’s Author Guidelines

After you select a target journal, identify the journal’s author guidelines to guide the formatting of your manuscript and references. Author guidelines will often (but not always) include instructions for titles, cover letters, and other components of a manuscript submission. Read the guidelines carefully. If you do not follow the guidelines, your article will be sent back to you.

Finally, do not submit your paper to more than one journal at a time. Even if this is not explicitly stated in the author guidelines of your target journal, it is considered inappropriate and unprofessional.

Your title should invite readers to continue reading beyond the first page [ 4 , 5 ]. It should be informative and interesting. Consider describing the independent and dependent variables, the population and setting, the study design, the timing, and even the main result in your title. Because the focus of the paper can change as you write and revise, we recommend you wait until you have finished writing your paper before composing the title.

Be sure that the title is useful for potential readers searching for your topic. The keywords you select should complement those in your title to maximize the likelihood that a researcher will find your paper through a database search. Avoid using abbreviations in your title unless they are very well known, such as SNP, because it is more likely that someone will use a complete word rather than an abbreviation as a search term to help readers find your paper.

After you have written a complete draft, use the checklist (Fig. 3 ) below to guide your revisions and editing. Additional resources are available on writing the abstract and citing references [ 5 ]. When you feel that your work is ready, ask a trusted colleague or two to read the work and provide informal feedback. The box below provides a checklist that summarizes the key points offered in this article.

Checklist for manuscript quality

Data Availability

Michalek AM (2014) Down the rabbit hole…advice to reviewers. J Cancer Educ 29:4–5

Article   Google Scholar  

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the role of authors and contributors: who is an author? http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authosrs-and-contributors.html . Accessed 15 January, 2020

Vetto JT (2014) Short and sweet: a short course on concise medical writing. J Cancer Educ 29(1):194–195

Brett M, Kording K (2017) Ten simple rules for structuring papers. PLoS ComputBiol. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005619

Lang TA (2017) Writing a better research article. J Public Health Emerg. https://doi.org/10.21037/jphe.2017.11.06

Download references

Acknowledgments

Ella August is grateful to the Sustainable Sciences Institute for mentoring her in training researchers on writing and publishing their research.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr, 27599, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Clara Busse & Ella August

Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA

Ella August

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ella August .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interests.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

(PDF 362 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Busse, C., August, E. How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal. J Canc Educ 36 , 909–913 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Download citation

Published : 30 April 2020

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Manuscripts
• Scientific writing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• For Individuals
• For Businesses
• For Universities
• For Governments
• Online Degrees
• Find your New Career
• Join for Free

How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper (Project-Centered Course)

Taught in English

Some content may not be translated

Financial aid available

178,626 already enrolled

Gain insight into a topic and learn the fundamentals

Instructor: Mathis Plapp

Included with Coursera Plus

(2,562 reviews)

Details to know

Add to your LinkedIn profile

See how employees at top companies are mastering in-demand skills

Earn a career certificate

Add this credential to your LinkedIn profile, resume, or CV

Share it on social media and in your performance review

There are 4 modules in this course

What you will achieve:

In this project-based course, you will outline a complete scientific paper, choose an appropriate journal to which you'll submit the finished paper for publication, and prepare a checklist that will allow you to independently judge whether your paper is ready to submit. What you'll need to get started: This course is designed for students who have previous experience with academic research - you should be eager to adapt our writing and publishing advice to an existing personal project. If you just finished your graduate dissertation, just began your PhD, or are at a different stage of your academic journey or career and just want to publish your work, this course is for you. *About Project-Centered Courses: Project-Centered Courses are designed to help you complete a personally meaningful real-world project, with your instructor and a community of learners with similar goals providing guidance and suggestions along the way. By actively applying new concepts as you learn, you’ll master the course content more efficiently; you’ll also get a head start on using the skills you gain to make positive changes in your life and career. When you complete the course, you’ll have a finished project that you’ll be proud to use and share.

Understanding academia

In this section of the MOOC, you will learn what is necessary before writing a paper: the context in which the scientist is publishing. You will learn how to know your own community, through different exemples, and then we will present you how scientific journal and publication works. We will finish with a couple of ethical values that the academic world is sharing!

What's included

8 videos 4 readings 5 quizzes 2 discussion prompts

8 videos • Total 28 minutes

• Introduction by Mathis Plapp • 1 minute • Preview module
• Let me walk you through the course • 3 minutes
• French version of the class • 0 minutes
• Why is publishing important? • 3 minutes
• "KYC": Know Your Community • 4 minutes
• How journals work: the review process • 4 minutes
• Presentation of scientific journals • 4 minutes
• Ethical Guidelines • 5 minutes

4 readings • Total 40 minutes

• Teaching team • 10 minutes
• Breakthroughs! • 10 minutes
• Additional contents • 10 minutes
• Examples of guidelines • 10 minutes

5 quizzes • Total 150 minutes

• Why is publishing important? • 30 minutes
• Know your community • 30 minutes
• How journals work: the review process • 30 minutes
• Communication with the editorial board • 30 minutes
• Ethical Guidelines and intellectual property • 30 minutes

2 discussion prompts • Total 20 minutes

• Your thoughts • 10 minutes
• Compatibility between paper submission and editorial board • 10 minutes

Before writing: delimiting your scientific paper

A good paper do not loose focus throughout the entirety of its form. As such, we are going to give you a more detailed view on how to delimit your paper. We are going to lead you through your paper by taking a closer look at the paper definition which will ensure you don't loose focus. Then we will explain why the literature review is important and how to actually do it. And then we will guide you with advices as to how to find the so-what of your paper! This is important as research is all about so-what!

6 videos 1 reading 5 quizzes 4 discussion prompts

6 videos • Total 26 minutes

• Paper definition "KYP", Know Your Paper • 3 minutes • Preview module
• How to: the literature review 1/2: find a good literature review • 3 minutes
• How to: the literature review 2/2: construction of your own literature review • 6 minutes
• How to: the research design • 3 minutes
• How to: the gap • 4 minutes
• Presentation of Zotero: aggregate references • 4 minutes

1 reading • Total 10 minutes

• Books and tools • 10 minutes
• Literature Review • 30 minutes
• Main ideas • 30 minutes
• The Gap? • 30 minutes
• So, what? • 30 minutes
• Think about it • 30 minutes

4 discussion prompts • Total 40 minutes

• Compatibility between paper and journal • 10 minutes
• Understanding how the literature review is structured • 10 minutes
• Finding Useful References: Difficulties & Strategies for Success. • 10 minutes
• Comparing different research designs on the same subject • 10 minutes

Writing the paper: things you need to know

In this part of the MOOC, you will learn how to write your paper. In a first part, we will focus on the structure of the paper, and then you will be able to see how to use bibliographical tools such as zotero. Finally you will be required to write your own abstract and to do a peer review for the abstract of the others, as in real academic life!

5 videos 2 readings 2 quizzes 1 peer review 2 discussion prompts

5 videos • Total 27 minutes

• The structure of an academic paper • 7 minutes • Preview module
• On writing an academic paper, preliminary tips • 6 minutes
• How to: the bibliography • 3 minutes
• The abstract • 6 minutes
• Zotero: online features • 3 minutes

2 readings • Total 20 minutes

• Important readings before writing a paper • 10 minutes
• More detailed information on how to write your article • 10 minutes

2 quizzes • Total 60 minutes

• Please, try by yourself • 30 minutes
• The bibliography • 30 minutes

1 peer review • Total 60 minutes

• Peer reviewing of an abstract • 60 minutes
• Comparing different constructions of papers • 10 minutes
• Discussing abstracts • 10 minutes

After the writing: the check list

After writing the paper comes the time of reading your paper a few times in order to get everything perfect.In this section you will learn how to remove a lot of mistakes you might have been writing. In the end, you will have to build your own checklist corresponding to your own problems you want to avoid. After this, your article can be submitted and will hopefully be accepted!!

5 videos 3 readings 1 peer review 1 discussion prompt

5 videos • Total 36 minutes

• How to avoid being boring? • 5 minutes • Preview module
• The main mistakes to look for: format • 3 minutes
• 1. The researcher • 9 minutes
• 2. The editor • 13 minutes
• Constructing your checklist • 4 minutes

3 readings • Total 30 minutes

• Avoiding mistakes • 10 minutes
• Format and Writing Readings • 10 minutes
• Tips • 10 minutes
• Now it is your turn: the checking list • 60 minutes

1 discussion prompt • Total 10 minutes

• Several content worth taking a look at • 10 minutes

Instructor ratings

We asked all learners to give feedback on our instructors based on the quality of their teaching style.

École polytechnique combines research, teaching and innovation at the highest scientific and technological level worldwide to meet the challenges of the 21st century. At the forefront of French engineering schools for more than 200 years, its education promotes a culture of multidisciplinary scientific excellence, open in a strong humanist tradition.\n L’École polytechnique associe recherche, enseignement et innovation au meilleur niveau scientifique et technologique mondial pour répondre aux défis du XXIe siècle. En tête des écoles d’ingénieur françaises depuis plus de 200 ans, sa formation promeut une culture d’excellence scientifique pluridisciplinaire, ouverte dans une forte tradition humaniste.

Recommended if you're interested in Education

Stanford University

Writing in the Sciences

University of London

Understanding Research Methods

O.P. Jindal Global University

Introduction to Academic Writing

University of Cape Town

Research for Impact

Why people choose coursera for their career.

Learner reviews

Showing 3 of 2562

2,562 reviews

Reviewed on Feb 28, 2018

The course is well structured that guides a scholar to construct a research paper step by step in a steady and sure way. I would definitely recommend the course for new research scholars.

Reviewed on May 18, 2023

INDEED AN EXCELLENT COURSE I HAVE EVER ATTENDED AND I LIKE IT VERY MUCH.

TOO THE POINT AND EXACT ON THE TARGET. CONCISE BUT COMPREHENSIVE. KEEP IT UP AND KEEP MAINTAIN THE POSITION.

Reviewed on May 6, 2020

The course was really awesome... Some teachers's pronunciation accent was difficult to understand though the text written below the video helps me a-lot... Thanks to all teachers...

Open new doors with Coursera Plus

Unlimited access to 7,000+ world-class courses, hands-on projects, and job-ready certificate programs - all included in your subscription

Advance your career with an online degree

Earn a degree from world-class universities - 100% online

Join over 3,400 global companies that choose Coursera for Business

Upskill your employees to excel in the digital economy

Frequently asked questions

When will i have access to the lectures and assignments.

Access to lectures and assignments depends on your type of enrollment. If you take a course in audit mode, you will be able to see most course materials for free. To access graded assignments and to earn a Certificate, you will need to purchase the Certificate experience, during or after your audit. If you don't see the audit option:

The course may not offer an audit option. You can try a Free Trial instead, or apply for Financial Aid.

The course may offer 'Full Course, No Certificate' instead. This option lets you see all course materials, submit required assessments, and get a final grade. This also means that you will not be able to purchase a Certificate experience.

What will I get if I purchase the Certificate?

When you purchase a Certificate you get access to all course materials, including graded assignments. Upon completing the course, your electronic Certificate will be added to your Accomplishments page - from there, you can print your Certificate or add it to your LinkedIn profile. If you only want to read and view the course content, you can audit the course for free.

What is the refund policy?

You will be eligible for a full refund until two weeks after your payment date, or (for courses that have just launched) until two weeks after the first session of the course begins, whichever is later. You cannot receive a refund once you’ve earned a Course Certificate, even if you complete the course within the two-week refund period. See our full refund policy Opens in a new tab .

Is financial aid available?

Yes. In select learning programs, you can apply for financial aid or a scholarship if you can’t afford the enrollment fee. If fin aid or scholarship is available for your learning program selection, you’ll find a link to apply on the description page.

More questions

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections

Welcome to the PLOS Writing Center

Your source for scientific writing & publishing essentials.

A collection of free, practical guides and hands-on resources for authors looking to improve their scientific publishing skillset.

ARTICLE-WRITING ESSENTIALS

Your title is the first thing anyone who reads your article is going to see, and for many it will be where they stop reading. Learn how to write a title that helps readers find your article, draws your audience in and sets the stage for your research!

The abstract is your chance to let your readers know what they can expect from your article. Learn how to write a clear, and concise abstract that will keep your audience reading.

A clear methods section impacts editorial evaluation and readers’ understanding, and is also the backbone of transparency and replicability. Learn what to include in your methods section, and how much detail is appropriate.

In many fields, a statistical analysis forms the heart of both the methods and results sections of a manuscript. Learn how to report statistical analyses, and what other context is important for publication success and future reproducibility.

The discussion section contains the results and outcomes of a study. An effective discussion informs readers what can be learned from your experiment and provides context for the results.

Ensuring your manuscript is well-written makes it easier for editors, reviewers and readers to understand your work. Avoiding language errors can help accelerate review and minimize delays in the publication of your research.

The PLOS Writing Toolbox

Delivered to your inbox every two weeks, the Writing Toolbox features practical advice and tools you can use to prepare a research manuscript for submission success and build your scientific writing skillset. 

Discover how to navigate the peer review and publishing process, beyond writing your article.

The path to publication can be unsettling when you’re unsure what’s happening with your paper. Learn about staple journal workflows to see the detailed steps required for ensuring a rigorous and ethical publication.

Reputable journals screen for ethics at submission—and inability to pass ethics checks is one of the most common reasons for rejection. Unfortunately, once a study has begun, it’s often too late to secure the requisite ethical reviews and clearances. Learn how to prepare for publication success by ensuring your study meets all ethical requirements before work begins.

From preregistration, to preprints, to publication—learn how and when to share your study.

How you store your data matters. Even after you publish your article, your data needs to be accessible and useable for the long term so that other researchers can continue building on your work. Good data management practices make your data discoverable and easy to use, promote a strong foundation for reproducibility and increase your likelihood of citations.

You’ve just spent months completing your study, writing up the results and submitting to your top-choice journal. Now the feedback is in and it’s time to revise. Set out a clear plan for your response to keep yourself on-track and ensure edits don’t fall through the cracks.

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher.

Are you actively preparing a submission for a PLOS journal? Select the relevant journal below for more detailed guidelines. 

How to Write an Article  

Share the lessons of the Writing Center in a live, interactive training.

Access tried-and-tested training modules, complete with slides and talking points, workshop activities, and more.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals

How to write your paper

On this page, writing for a nature journal, how to write a scientific paper.

Before writing a paper, authors are advised to visit the author information pages of the journal to which they wish to submit (see this link for a  full list of Nature Portfolio publications ). Each journal has slightly different format requirements depending on readership, space, style and so on. The journal's website will contain detailed information about format, length limits, figure preparation, and similar matters. If your questions are not answered on these pages or through our recommended guidelines below, we suggest you contact the journal’s editorial office for further guidance before submitting. Contact information for the editorial offices can be found on the journal websites.

We also strongly recommend that authors read a few issues of the journal to which they wish to submit, to obtain a sense of the level, length and readership of the journal. Looking at the print issue, or at PDFs in the online edition, is particularly useful for details such as presentation of figures or style of reference numbering. (All Nature Portfolio journals have a free online issue of the journal for those who do not subscribe or have site-licence access, which can be accessed via the journal's "about" web page.)

Nature journals are international, so in writing a paper, authors should consider those readers for whom English is a second language. The journals are read mainly by professional scientists, so authors can avoid unnecessary simplification or didactic definitions. However, many readers are outside the immediate discipline of the author(s), so clarity of expression is needed to achieve the goal of comprehensibility. (See the section below for links to some websites that provide writing help and advice.)

Nature journals prefer authors to write in the active voice ("we performed the experiment...") as experience has shown that readers find concepts and results to be conveyed more clearly if written directly. We have also found that use of several adjectives to qualify one noun in highly technical language can be confusing to readers. We encourage authors to "unpackage" concepts and to present their findings and conclusions in simply constructed sentences.

Many papers submitted for publication in a Nature journal contain unnecessary technical terminology, unreadable descriptions of the work that has been done, and convoluted figure legends. Our journal subeditors and copyeditors edit the manuscript so that it is grammatically correct, logical, clear and concise. They also ensure that manuscripts use consistent search terms and terminology that is consistent with what is used in previous articles published in the journal. Of course, this process is assisted greatly if the authors have written the manuscript in a simple and accessible style, as the author is the best person to convey the message of the paper and to persuade readers that it is important enough to spend time on.

We ask authors to avoid jargon and acronyms where possible. When essential, they should be defined at first use; after first use, the author should use pronouns when possible rather than using the abbreviation or acronym at every occurrence. The acronym is second-nature to the author but is not to the reader, who may have to refer to the original definition throughout the paper when an acronym is used.

Titles need to be comprehensible and enticing to a potential reader quickly scanning a table of contents or performing an online search, while at the same time not being so general or vague as to obscure what the paper is about. We ask authors to be aware of abstracting and indexing services when devising a title for the paper: providing one or two essential keywords within a title will be beneficial for web-search results.

Within the text of papers, Nature journals use a numbering (Vancouver) system for references, not the Harvard method whereby the authors and year of publication are included in the text in parentheses. We adopt this numbering style because we believe the text flows more smoothly, and hence is quicker for the reader to absorb.

Our experience has shown that a paper's impact is maximized if it is as short as is consistent with providing a focused message, with a few crucial figures or tables. Authors can place technical information (figures, protocols, methods, tables, additional data) necessary to support their conclusion into Supplementary Information (SI), which is published online-only to accompany the published print/online paper. SI is peer-reviewed, and we believe that its use means that the impact of the conclusions of the study is enhanced by being presented in concise and focused form in the print/online journal, emphasizing the key conclusions of the research and yet providing the full supporting details required by others in the field in online-only form. We encourage authors to use SI  in this way to enhance the impact of the print/online version, and hence to increase its readership. Authors are asked to provide short "signposts" at appropriate points in their paper to indicate that SI is present to expand on a particular point (for example "for more details, see figure x in SI) so that readers can navigate easily to the relevant information.  We also encourage authors who are describing methods and protocols to provide the full details as SI.

We all face the challenge of how to make the best use of our time in an era of information overload. Judicious use of SI to ensure that the printed version of a paper is clear, comprehensible and as short as is consistent with this goal, is very likely to increase the paper's readership, impact and the number of times others cite it.

Nature Physics: the Editorial  Elements of style  explains the importance of clear and accessible writing. The advice contained within this Editorial applies to all the Nature journals.

Top of page ⤴

A number of articles and websites provide detailed guidelines and advice about writing and submitting scientific papers. Some suggested sources are:

• SciDev.Net's  Practical guides section  (including  How to submit a paper to a scientific journal  and  How to write a scientific paper )
• The Human Frontier Science Program's report  Websites and Searching for Collaborations  also contains useful writing guidelines for non-native-English speakers, as well as other helpful advice related to scientific publishing
• The classic book Elements of Style by William J. Strunk, Jr (Humphrey, New York, 1918) is now published by Bartleby.com (New York, 1999) and is  freely available on the web  in searchable format.
• Advice about how to write a Nature journal paper is provided in the Nature Physics Editorial  Elements of style .
• Advice about how to write a summary paragraph (abstract) in Nature Letter format is available as a  one-page downloadable information sheet .
• An amusing but pertinent algorithm,  How to write a paper (one possible answer) is at Nature Network's New York blog.

How can you help improve your manuscript for publication?

Presenting your work in a well-structured manuscript and in well-written English gives it its best chance for editors and reviewers to understand it and evaluate it fairly. Many researchers find that getting some independent support helps them present their results in the best possible light. The experts at Springer Nature Author Services can help you with manuscript preparation—including English language editing, developmental comments, manuscript formatting, figure preparation, translation, and more. 

Get started and save 15%

You can also use our free Grammar Check tool for an evaluation of your work.

Please note that using these tools, or any other service, is not a requirement for publication, nor does it imply or guarantee that editors will accept the article, or even select it for peer review. 

For authors from China 

 您怎么做才有助于改进您的稿件以便顺利发表？

如果在结构精巧的稿件中用精心组织的英语展示您的作品，就能最大限度地让编辑和审稿人理解并公正评估您的作品。许多研究人员发现，获得一些独立支持有助于他们以尽可能美好的方式展示他们的成果。Springer Nature Author Services 的专家可帮助您准备稿件，具体包括润色英语表述、添加有见地的注释、为稿件排版、设计图表、翻译等。 

开始使用即可节省 15% 的费用

您还可以使用我们的 免费语法检查工具 来评估您的作品。

请注意，使用这些工具或任何其他服务不是发表前必须满足的要求，也不暗示或保证相关文章定会被编辑接受（甚至未必会被选送同行评审）。

For authors from Japan

発表に備えて、論文を改善するにはどうすればよいでしょうか？

内容が適切に組み立てられ、質の高い英語で書かれた論文を投稿すれば、編集者や査読者が論文を理解し、公正に評価するための最善の機会となります。多くの研究者は、個別のサポートを受けることで、研究結果を可能な限り最高の形で発表できると思っています。Springer Nature Author Servicesのエキスパートが、英文の編集、建設的な提言、論文の書式、図の調整、翻訳など、論文の作成をサポートいたします。 

今なら15％割引でご利用いただけます

原稿の評価に、無料 の文法チェック ツールもご利用いただけます。

これらのツールや他のサービスをご利用いただくことは、論文を掲載するための要件ではありません。また、編集者が論文を受理したり、査読に選定したりすることを示唆または保証するものではないことにご注意ください。

For authors from Korea

게재를 위해 원고를 개선하려면 어떻게 해야 할까요?

여러분의 작품을 체계적인 원고로 발표하는 것은 편집자와 심사자가 여러분의 연구를 이해하고 공정하게 평가할 수 있는 최선의 기회를 제공합니다. 많은 연구자들은 어느 정도 독립적인 지원을 받는 것이 가능한 한 최선의 방법으로 자신의 결과를 발표하는 데 도움이 된다고 합니다. Springer Nature Author Services 전문가들은 영어 편집, 발전적인 논평, 원고 서식 지정, 그림 준비, 번역 등과 같은 원고 준비를 도와드릴 수 있습니다. 

지금 시작하면 15% 할인됩니다.

또한 당사의 무료 문법 검사 도구를 사용하여 여러분의 연구를 평가할 수 있습니다.

이러한 도구 또는 기타 서비스를 사용하는 것은 게재를 위한 필수 요구사항이 아니며, 편집자가 해당 논문을 수락하거나 피어 리뷰에 해당 논문을 선택한다는 것을 암시하거나 보장하지는 않습니다.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• How To Find Articles with Databases
• Video Learning
• Artificial Intelligence Tools
• Commercialization & Industry
• How To Evaluate Articles
• Search Tips, General
• Develop a Research Question
• How To Read A Scientific Paper
• How To Interpret Data
• How To Write A Scientific Paper
• Get More Help
• Teaching Materials
• Other STEM Guides
• Systematic & Evideced-Based Reviews

Writing a Scientific Paper or Lab Report

Writing a scientific paper is very similar to writing a lab report. The structure of each is primarily the same, but the purpose of each is different

Lab reports are meant to reflect understanding of the material and learn something new Scientific papers are meant to contribute knowledge to a field of study.

Both are generally broken down into eight sections: title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusion, and references. 

• Ex: Determining the Free Chlorine Content of Pool Water"
• Abstracts are a summary of the research as a whole and should familiarize the reader with the purpose of the research. 
• Abstracts will always be written last, even though they are the first paragraph of a scientific paper. 
• Unlike a lab report, all scientific papers will have an abstract.
• Why was the research done?
• What problem is being addressed?
• What results were found?
• What are the meaning of the results?
• How is the problem better understood now than before, if at all?

Introduction

• The introduction of a scientific paper discusses the problem being studied and other theory that is relevant to understanding the findings. 
• The hypothesis of the experiment and the motivation for the research are stated in this section. 
• Write the introduction in your own words. Try not to copy from a lab manual or other guidelines. Instead, show comprehension of the research by briefly explaining the problem.
• Methods and Materials
• Ex: pipette, graduated cylinder, 1.13mg of Na, 0.67mg Ag
• List the steps taken as they actually happened during the experiment, not as they were supposed to happen. 
• If written correctly, another researcher should be able to duplicate the experiment and get the same or very similar results. 
• In a scientific paper, most often the steps taken during the research are discussed more in length and with more detail than they are in lab reports. 
• The results show the data that was collected or found during the research. 
• Explain in words the data that was collected.
• Tables should be labeled numerically, as "Table 1", "Table 2", etc. Other figures should be labeled numerically as "Figure 1", "Figure 2", etc. 
• Calculations to understand the data can also be presented in the results. 
• The discussion section is one of the most important parts of a scientific paper. It analyzes the results of the research and is a discussion of the data. 
• If any results are unexpected, explain why they are unexpected and how they did or did not effect the data obtained. 
• Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the design of the research and compare your results to similar research.
• If there are any experimental errors, analyze them.
• Explain your results and discuss them using relevant terms and theories.
• What do the results indicate?
• What is the significance of the results?
• Are there any gaps in knowledge?
• Are there any new questions that have been raised?
• The conclusion is a summation of the experiment. It should clearly and concisely state what was learned and its importance.
• If there is future work that needs to be done, it can be explained in the conclusion.
• When any outside sources to support a claim or explain background information, those sources must be cited in the references section of the lab report. 
• Scientific papers will always use outside references. 

Other Useful Sources

• How to Write a Scientific Article
• Writing a Scientific Research Article
• How to Write a Good Scientific Paper
• << Previous: How To Interpret Data
• Next: Get More Help >>
• Last Updated: Jul 10, 2024 2:11 PM
• URL: https://guides.libraries.indiana.edu/STEM

Social media

• Instagram for Herman B Wells Library
• Facebook for IU Libraries

Additional resources

Featured databases.

• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) OneSearch@IU
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Academic Search (EBSCO)
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) ERIC (EBSCO)
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Nexis Uni
• Resource available without restriction HathiTrust Digital Library
• Databases A-Z
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Google Scholar
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) JSTOR
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Web of Science
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) Scopus
• Resource available to authorized IU Bloomington users (on or off campus) WorldCat

IU Libraries

• Diversity Resources
• About IU Libraries
• Alumni & Friends
• Departments & Staff
• Jobs & Libraries HR
• Intranet (Staff)
• IUL site admin

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide

Published on September 24, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on March 27, 2023.

The introduction to a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your topic and get the reader interested
• Provide background or summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Detail your specific research problem and problem statement
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The introduction looks slightly different depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or constructs an argument by engaging with a variety of sources.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Step 1: introduce your topic, step 2: describe the background, step 3: establish your research problem, step 4: specify your objective(s), step 5: map out your paper, research paper introduction examples, frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction.

The first job of the introduction is to tell the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening hook.

The hook is a striking opening sentence that clearly conveys the relevance of your topic. Think of an interesting fact or statistic, a strong statement, a question, or a brief anecdote that will get the reader wondering about your topic.

For example, the following could be an effective hook for an argumentative paper about the environmental impact of cattle farming:

A more empirical paper investigating the relationship of Instagram use with body image issues in adolescent girls might use the following hook:

Don’t feel that your hook necessarily has to be deeply impressive or creative. Clarity and relevance are still more important than catchiness. The key thing is to guide the reader into your topic and situate your ideas.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

This part of the introduction differs depending on what approach your paper is taking.

In a more argumentative paper, you’ll explore some general background here. In a more empirical paper, this is the place to review previous research and establish how yours fits in.

Argumentative paper: Background information

After you’ve caught your reader’s attention, specify a bit more, providing context and narrowing down your topic.

Provide only the most relevant background information. The introduction isn’t the place to get too in-depth; if more background is essential to your paper, it can appear in the body .

Empirical paper: Describing previous research

For a paper describing original research, you’ll instead provide an overview of the most relevant research that has already been conducted. This is a sort of miniature literature review —a sketch of the current state of research into your topic, boiled down to a few sentences.

This should be informed by genuine engagement with the literature. Your search can be less extensive than in a full literature review, but a clear sense of the relevant research is crucial to inform your own work.

Begin by establishing the kinds of research that have been done, and end with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to respond to.

The next step is to clarify how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses.

Argumentative paper: Emphasize importance

In an argumentative research paper, you can simply state the problem you intend to discuss, and what is original or important about your argument.

Empirical paper: Relate to the literature

In an empirical research paper, try to lead into the problem on the basis of your discussion of the literature. Think in terms of these questions:

• What research gap is your work intended to fill?
• What limitations in previous work does it address?
• What contribution to knowledge does it make?

You can make the connection between your problem and the existing research using phrases like the following.

Now you’ll get into the specifics of what you intend to find out or express in your research paper.

The way you frame your research objectives varies. An argumentative paper presents a thesis statement, while an empirical paper generally poses a research question (sometimes with a hypothesis as to the answer).

Argumentative paper: Thesis statement

The thesis statement expresses the position that the rest of the paper will present evidence and arguments for. It can be presented in one or two sentences, and should state your position clearly and directly, without providing specific arguments for it at this point.

Empirical paper: Research question and hypothesis

The research question is the question you want to answer in an empirical research paper.

Present your research question clearly and directly, with a minimum of discussion at this point. The rest of the paper will be taken up with discussing and investigating this question; here you just need to express it.

A research question can be framed either directly or indirectly.

• This study set out to answer the following question: What effects does daily use of Instagram have on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls?
• We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls.

If your research involved testing hypotheses , these should be stated along with your research question. They are usually presented in the past tense, since the hypothesis will already have been tested by the time you are writing up your paper.

For example, the following hypothesis might respond to the research question above:

The final part of the introduction is often dedicated to a brief overview of the rest of the paper.

In a paper structured using the standard scientific “introduction, methods, results, discussion” format, this isn’t always necessary. But if your paper is structured in a less predictable way, it’s important to describe the shape of it for the reader.

If included, the overview should be concise, direct, and written in the present tense.

• This paper will first discuss several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then will go on to …
• This paper first discusses several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then goes on to …

Full examples of research paper introductions are shown in the tabs below: one for an argumentative paper, the other for an empirical paper.

• Argumentative paper
• Empirical paper

Are cows responsible for climate change? A recent study (RIVM, 2019) shows that cattle farmers account for two thirds of agricultural nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands. These emissions result from nitrogen in manure, which can degrade into ammonia and enter the atmosphere. The study’s calculations show that agriculture is the main source of nitrogen pollution, accounting for 46% of the country’s total emissions. By comparison, road traffic and households are responsible for 6.1% each, the industrial sector for 1%. While efforts are being made to mitigate these emissions, policymakers are reluctant to reckon with the scale of the problem. The approach presented here is a radical one, but commensurate with the issue. This paper argues that the Dutch government must stimulate and subsidize livestock farmers, especially cattle farmers, to transition to sustainable vegetable farming. It first establishes the inadequacy of current mitigation measures, then discusses the various advantages of the results proposed, and finally addresses potential objections to the plan on economic grounds.

The rise of social media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in the prevalence of body image issues among women and girls. This correlation has received significant academic attention: Various empirical studies have been conducted into Facebook usage among adolescent girls (Tiggermann & Slater, 2013; Meier & Gray, 2014). These studies have consistently found that the visual and interactive aspects of the platform have the greatest influence on body image issues. Despite this, highly visual social media (HVSM) such as Instagram have yet to be robustly researched. This paper sets out to address this research gap. We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls. It was hypothesized that daily Instagram use would be associated with an increase in body image concerns and a decrease in self-esteem ratings.

The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:

• A hook to catch the reader’s interest
• Relevant background on the topic
• Details of your research problem

and your problem statement

• A thesis statement or research question
• Sometimes an overview of the paper

Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.

This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, March 27). Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved July 11, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-introduction/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, writing a research paper conclusion | step-by-step guide, research paper format | apa, mla, & chicago templates, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

• Langson Library
• Science Library
• Grunigen Medical Library
• Law Library
• Connect From Off-Campus
• Accessibility
• Gateway Study Center

Email this link

Writing a scientific paper.

• Writing a lab report
• INTRODUCTION

Writing a "good" methods section

"methods checklist" from: how to write a good scientific paper. chris a. mack. spie. 2018..

• LITERATURE CITED
• Bibliography of guides to scientific writing and presenting
• Peer Review
• Presentations
• Lab Report Writing Guides on the Web

The purpose is to provide enough detail that a competent worker could repeat the experiment. Many of your readers will skip this section because they already know from the Introduction the general methods you used. However careful writing of this section is important because for your results to be of scientific merit they must be reproducible. Otherwise your paper does not represent good science.

• Exact technical specifications and quantities and source or method of preparation
• Describe equipment used and provide illustrations where relevant.
• Chronological presentation (but related methods described together)
• Questions about "how" and "how much" are answered for the reader and not left for them to puzzle over
• Discuss statistical methods only if unusual or advanced
• When a large number of components are used prepare tables for the benefit of the reader
• Do not state the action without stating the agent of the action
• Describe how the results were generated with sufficient detail so that an independent researcher (working in the same field) could reproduce the results sufficiently to allow validation of the conclusions.
• Can the reader assess internal validity (conclusions are supported by the results presented)?
• Can the reader assess external validity (conclusions are properly generalized beyond these specific results)?
• Has the chosen method been justified?
• Are data analysis and statistical approaches justified, with assumptions and biases considered?
• Avoid: including results in the Method section; including extraneous details (unnecessary to enable reproducibility or judge validity); treating the method as a chronological history of events; unneeded references to commercial products; references to “proprietary” products or processes unavailable to the reader. 
• << Previous: INTRODUCTION
• Next: RESULTS >>
• Last Updated: Aug 4, 2023 9:33 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uci.edu/scientificwriting

Off-campus? Please use the Software VPN and choose the group UCIFull to access licensed content. For more information, please Click here

Software VPN is not available for guests, so they may not have access to some content when connecting from off-campus.

• The Scientist University

How to Write Science for a General Audience

Writing for a non-scientific audience uses many of the same skills as writing for other scientists, but uses a bit more of an author’s personal flair..

Nathan Ni holds a PhD from Queens University. He is a science editor for The Scientist’s Creative Services Team who strives to better understand and communicate the relationships between health and disease.

View full profile.

Learn about our editorial policies.

Scientific writing, like any technical field, has its own norms and regulations. There are different varieties of scientific writing, including medical, technical, and academic, and scientists have a general idea of how a manuscript, white paper, or report should be scripted when writing for their fellow scientists. In the same way, science may use words that overlap with the common vernacular, but it very much has its own language. 

All of this creates a problem when scientists suddenly have to communicate to a non-scientific audience. Words such as hypothesis, thesis, bias, error, anomaly, and so on mean something different to the general public than they do to the scientific community. If scientists do not pivot their language accordingly, this creates a disconnect between what the scientist thinks they are saying and what the audience is actually hearing. Finding the correct wavelength is not only important for conveying the intended message, but also for managing expectations and maintaining credibility not just for the scientist delivering the message, but for science as a whole.

Determine the Audience’s Interests

It is always important to tailor one’s message according to the audience’s interests, but it is especially critical to do so when communicating with an audience that does not share a particular background with the author or speaker. Certainly, scientists are familiar with writing for other scientists rather than for themselves, but one must admit that it is easier for a scientist to know what another scientist wants to hear and read about. 

What is the general public interested in? Things that directly affect them. For example, when writing about disease research, the audience is less concerned with the nature of the new discovery and more concerned with what it means for that disease in particular—whether in terms of risk, diagnosis, treatment, or prevention. Similarly, new findings in biotechnology need to be placed in the context of how these new advances could shape day-to-day lives. Finally, it is important to remember that this is a two-way street. Something that excites the scientific community may seem benign to a non-expert audience lacking sufficient context, while a preliminary study, presented inappropriately, may elicit undeserved hype and expectations.

Treat the Audience as Equals

The other part of connecting with the audience is treating them as equals. Scientists should not assume that the audience has the background to understand their message without explanation. Rather, scientists should give the audience as much context as possible and trust them to put the pieces together. Avoid sensationalism or lecturing at all costs. Explain the background information that encouraged the study. Show the audience the process—conception, design, data collection, and analysis—that drove the conclusions. Above all, tell a transparent, open, and engaging story about the scientific journey that led to these findings. 

The audience respects effort and motivation on a personal level. Scientists may pride the agnostic nature of a series of graphs and numbers, but a non-scientific audience wants to know why they should trust the numbers—and the people who gathered and analyzed them. If the authors can convince the audience to respect their motivations and travails, they can convince them to look at their data and conclusions with an open mind. 

Show a Creative Side

Ultimately, humans want to know more than the numbers—they want to know the humans behind the data. This is where scientists have a chance to be creative and show more personality. They should frame data in ways that the public will understand, using analogies to common real-life situations and phenomena to help the audience understand and visualize scientific concepts. Scientists should not be strangers to this, as they have been doing it for hundreds of years : invisible sound waves are derived from the visible motions of bodies of water, cells are called such because they reminded Robert Hooke of small rooms (also called cells) in monasteries, and genes are referred to as “blueprints” and “building blocks,” harkening to things used in construction and engineering. 1 Offering the audience a sense of scale and relativity will allow them to properly evaluate the scope and significance of your message.

The laboratory is stereotyped in fiction as a mysterious place, walled off from the rest of society and accessible only by a chosen few. When communicating outside of the field, scientists need to dispel this notion and bring the audience with them inside the laboratory. Through their words, they should bring the audience to the bench with them, showing them that science—despite its cold, calculating, and mechanical reputation—is still driven by people, for people.

Looking for more information on scientific writing? Check out The Scientist ’s   TS SciComm   section. Looking for some help putting together a manuscript, a figure, a poster, or anything else? The Scientist ’s   Scientific Services   has the professional help that you need.

• Taylor C, Dewsbury BM. On the problem and promise of metaphor use in science and science communication . J Microbiol Biol Educ . 2018;19(1):19.1.46. 

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

How to write a scientific paper

Affiliation.

• 1 The FEBS Journal Editorial Office, Cambridge, UK.
• PMID: 27870269
• DOI: 10.1111/febs.13918

In the first instalment of the Words of Advice series, we feature the essentials of good manuscript writing with practical tips on how to plan, organise and write a standout scientific paper.

© 2016 Federation of European Biochemical Societies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Writing a better research paper: Advice for young authors. Elston DM. Elston DM. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019 Feb;80(2):379. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2017.11.010. Epub 2017 Nov 8. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019. PMID: 29128449 No abstract available.
• Ten tips to improve the likelihood of manuscript acceptance for publication in JSPN. Ryan-Wenger NA. Ryan-Wenger NA. J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2017 Apr;22(2). doi: 10.1111/jspn.12183. J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2017. PMID: 28425204 No abstract available.
• How to write a perfect scientific manuscript. Rylski B. Rylski B. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015 Aug;48(2):179. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezv217. Epub 2015 Jun 11. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015. PMID: 26069240 No abstract available.
• How to write a scientific manuscript for publication. Liumbruno GM, Velati C, Pasqualetti P, Franchini M. Liumbruno GM, et al. Blood Transfus. 2013 Apr;11(2):217-26. doi: 10.2450/2012.0247-12. Epub 2012 Dec 21. Blood Transfus. 2013. PMID: 23356975 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
• Teaching how to prepare a manuscript by means of rewriting published scientific papers. Tomaska L. Tomaska L. Genetics. 2007 Jan;175(1):17-20. doi: 10.1534/genetics.106.066217. Epub 2006 Nov 16. Genetics. 2007. PMID: 17110479 Free PMC article. Review.
• Editorial viewpoints of scientific publishing for early-career research scientists. Peng PC, Coleman FT. Peng PC, et al. BMC Proc. 2024 Jan 16;18(Suppl 1):4. doi: 10.1186/s12919-023-00286-7. BMC Proc. 2024. PMID: 38229056 Free PMC article. Review.
• Peer Reviewed Publication Skills Matter for Academicians. Behzadi P. Behzadi P. Iran J Pathol. 2021 Winter;16(1):95-96. doi: 10.30699/ijp.2020.129608.2426. Epub 2020 Oct 10. Iran J Pathol. 2021. PMID: 33391388 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
• How to write that paper. Villar R. Villar R. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2020 Apr 15;7(1):1-3. doi: 10.1093/jhps/hnaa010. eCollection 2020 Jan. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2020. PMID: 32382422 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
• A Proposal for Nomenclature in Myeloid C-Type Lectin Receptors. Del Fresno C, Cueto FJ, Sancho D. Del Fresno C, et al. Front Immunol. 2019 Sep 6;10:2098. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.02098. eCollection 2019. Front Immunol. 2019. PMID: 31555291 Free PMC article. Review.
• Congress of the German Society of Transfusion Medicine and Immunohematology - 50th Anniversary. Klüter H, Gathof B, Schlenke P. Klüter H, et al. Transfus Med Hemother. 2017 Sep;44(5):288-289. doi: 10.1159/000481546. Epub 2017 Sep 26. Transfus Med Hemother. 2017. PMID: 29070972 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Ovid Technologies, Inc.

Other Literature Sources

• scite Smart Citations

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Search St. Lawrence

• How to Write a Scientific Research Paper
• Office & Department Directory
• Geology Department

Scientific research is not a solitary endeavor. Rather, science is a communal effort. Scientists use findings and ideas of other scientists as the basis for their own studies, and in turn report their findings back to the scientific community. Thus, communication of findings is part of the scientific process. In fact, only by writing papers, presenting seminars, or reporting findings in some other way, does one become a full participant in the scientific or research community. In other words, a good scientist is also a good communicator.

A scientific research paper normally follows a standard outline and format (bolded below). A common problem in many scientific papers is that the author does not organize material into the appropriate sections. Thus, pay close attention to the functions of the various sections described herein.

TITLE. The title of your paper is very important. It should be a clear and concise description of the content of the paper. When creating a title, express the subject but do not try to impress the reader with technical jargon. Sometimes a clever, informed phrase can attract readers, but wittiness is not the goal. Remember, your goal is to communicate information. A simple, direct title is usually best.

ABSTRACT. The abstract summarizes the essentials of the paper. It briefly describes the purpose, any unusual methodology, and key results of the project. Abstracts are often limited to a few hundred words, so they need to be concise. The abstract is best written after a paper is completed. (For more information on writing a good abstract, see the Abstract UFI.)

INTRODUCTION. Good scientific papers explain how the specific study being described is related to other research and ideas on the same topic. Good papers not only report on the specific details of a particular project but also help illuminate larger issues of interest to readers of the discipline. The introduction is where the author helps the reader see the larger context for the specific study. This is accomplished by briefly reviewing some of the relevant literature and explaining how the current project is related to the existing body of work. Interpretations made earlier and now known to be incorrect are disqualified here as well. This is also the time to describe the goals and objectives of the study, e.g., to test certain hypotheses or answer a set of questions.

METHODOLOGY. The methodology section, sometimes called "Materials and Methods", is where the author describes how the study was conducted. The description should be complete enough so that the reader can evaluate the appropriateness of the methods to answer the questions or test the hypotheses as presented in the Introduction. If you employed some methods that others have used, you should cite the publications in which those methods are described. In many cases, it is appropriate for geologists to include a subsection (or even a separate section) in which you describe your study site. Headings often used include “Geologic Setting”, or “Location”, or (“Stratigraphic”, “Depositional” or “Structural”) “Setting”. If some statistical analyses were performed on the data, they should be described completely and accurately in the Methodology section. Another worker should be able to easily repeat your methods.

RESULTS. In the Results section, one should report, but not discuss, the primary results. In other words, "Just the facts, please". The verbal report of results is supplemented with tables of data and/or figures (graphs, diagrams, photographs, etc.). Remember, it is not the reader's job to figure out what the various tables and figures are trying to illustrate. An author needs to summarize the key findings verbally first and then refer the reader to relevant tables and figures for more a more detailed, or graphic, representation of the results. Figures and tables should each be numbered consecutively so that the reader may refer to them when intended, e.g., „The results show a strong correlation between rate of uplift and rate of erosion (Fig. 3)'. All tables should have a descriptive title, and a caption for each figure should be provided. The caption should include the subject or title of the figure and all other information that will help the reader understand or interpret what is being illustrated.

Notice that much of this discussion of “Results” is focused on Figures and Tables. This is no accident. In geological writing, it is as important (more important?) to carefully plan illustrations and tables as it is the text. Poor illustrations can negate very sound research by failing to clearly illustrate one‟s discoveries. In fact poor graphing skills can fail to demonstrate scientific relationships that are present in one‟s data. Researchers are responsible for learning how best to graph relationships and how to work with graphics to best illustrate their scientific results (see the related handout on “Preparing Scientific Posters for Geologic Conferences.”).

DISCUSSION. The discussion is the section of the paper in which the author describes what the results mean. Were the original hypotheses supported, or questions answered? How are unexpected results explained? Do findings support or contradict findings from similar studies? These are some of the sorts of questions you might address. If most of the discussion is confined to the specific results of your study, the section may be better titled “Interpretations” or “Analysis of Results”. However, it is usually appropriate to comment on the larger significance and ramifications of your findings as part of a “Discussion” of the implications of the work. This section should include thorough citation of the works of others that are involved in your discussion.

CONCLUSIONS. It is often important to extract the main conclusions from the text and summarize them as the “take home” ideas of the paper. This is frequently done with a numbered list of the points made.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. Most scientific articles include a brief, but important, section in which the authors thank various people, granting agencies and institutions who have contributed in some way to the work. These contributions could be in helping to form the original hypotheses, collecting data, aiding data analysis, providing financial resources or collecting permission, or reviewing an earlier draft.

LITERATURE CITED. This section is sometimes called “References Cited”. Here one provides full citations for all works mentioned in the body of the paper and only those works mentioned in the paper. Every research paper follows one or another bibliographic style. Check with professors (or journal editors) to learn the style, or apply a digital style editor, and use it consistently for all citations.

A FEW FINAL THOUGHTS. Contrary to what most students have been taught, there is no hard and fast rule about the use of active vs passive voice in scientific articles. Likewise, there is no standard format for citing other sources or for citation style in the Literature Cited section. This means you need to consult with the editor or professor ahead of time to find out the specific instructions for the paper you are writing. Above all strive to be direct and clear. Ultimately, you are trying to persuade the readers about the significance of your findings. Only in very rare circumstances do results speak for themselves. In most cases they need an ardent and articulate advocate- -you!

This UFI (Useful Flyer of Information) was developed and written by Mark A. Davis for the benefit of students. It has been modified by J. M. Erickson and the Geowriting class at St. Lawrence University. For other UFIs see the Geology Dept.UFI webpage

• Request Info Discover why St. Lawrence is the right choice
• Visit & Tour Plan a tour in person or virtually
• Apply Begin your application process

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

6 Steps to Write an Excellent Discussion in Your Manuscript

• 4 minute read
• 17.9K views

Table of Contents

The discussion section in scientific manuscripts might be the last few paragraphs, but its role goes far beyond wrapping up. It’s the part of an article where scientists talk about what they found and what it means, where raw data turns into meaningful insights. Therefore, discussion is a vital component of the article.  

An excellent discussion is well-organized. We bring to you authors a classic 6-step method for writing discussion sections, with examples to illustrate the functions and specific writing logic of each step. Take a look at how you can impress journal reviewers with a concise and focused discussion section!  

Discussion frame structure   

Conventionally, a discussion section has three parts: an introductory paragraph, a few intermediate paragraphs, and a conclusion¹.  Please follow the steps below:  

1.Introduction—mention gaps in previous research¹⁻ ²

Here, you orient the reader to your study. In the first paragraph, it is advisable to mention the research gap your paper addresses.  

Example: This study investigated the cognitive effects of a meat-only diet on adults. While earlier studies have explored the impact of a carnivorous diet on physical attributes and agility, they have not explicitly addressed its influence on cognitively intense tasks involving memory and reasoning.  

2. Summarizing key findings—let your data speak ¹⁻ ²

After you have laid out the context for your study, recapitulate some of its key findings. Also, highlight key data and evidence supporting these findings.  

Example: We found that risk-taking behavior among teenagers correlates with their tendency to invest in cryptocurrencies. Risk takers in this study, as measured by the Cambridge Gambling Task, tended to have an inordinately higher proportion of their savings invested as crypto coins.  

3. Interpreting results—compare with other papers¹⁻²    

Here, you must analyze and interpret any results concerning the research question or hypothesis. How do the key findings of your study help verify or disprove the hypothesis? What practical relevance does your discovery have?  

Example: Our study suggests that higher daily caffeine intake is not associated with poor performance in major sporting events. Athletes may benefit from the cardiovascular benefits of daily caffeine intake without adversely impacting performance.    

Remember, unlike the results section, the discussion ideally focuses on locating your findings in the larger body of existing research. Hence, compare your results with those of other peer-reviewed papers.  

Example: Although Miller et al. (2020) found evidence of such political bias in a multicultural population, our findings suggest that the bias is weak or virtually non-existent among politically active citizens.  

4. Addressing limitations—their potential impact on the results¹⁻²    

Discuss the potential impact of limitations on the results. Most studies have limitations, and it is crucial to acknowledge them in the intermediary paragraphs of the discussion section. Limitations may include low sample size, suspected interference or noise in data, low effect size, etc.  

Example: This study explored a comprehensive list of adverse effects associated with the novel drug ‘X’. However, long-term studies may be needed to confirm its safety, especially regarding major cardiac events.  

5. Implications for future research—how to explore further¹⁻²    

Locate areas of your research where more investigation is needed. Concluding paragraphs of the discussion can explain what research will likely confirm your results or identify knowledge gaps your study left unaddressed.  

Example: Our study demonstrates that roads paved with the plastic-infused compound ‘Y’ are more resilient than asphalt. Future studies may explore economically feasible ways of producing compound Y in bulk.  

6. Conclusion—summarize content¹⁻²    

A good way to wind up the discussion section is by revisiting the research question mentioned in your introduction. Sign off by expressing the main findings of your study.  

Example: Recent observations suggest that the fish ‘Z’ is moving upriver in many parts of the Amazon basin. Our findings provide conclusive evidence that this phenomenon is associated with rising sea levels and climate change, not due to elevated numbers of invasive predators.  

A rigorous and concise discussion section is one of the keys to achieving an excellent paper. It serves as a critical platform for researchers to interpret and connect their findings with the broader scientific context. By detailing the results, carefully comparing them with existing research, and explaining the limitations of this study, you can effectively help reviewers and readers understand the entire research article more comprehensively and deeply¹⁻² , thereby helping your manuscript to be successfully published and gain wider dissemination.  

In addition to keeping this writing guide, you can also use Elsevier Language Services to improve the quality of your paper more deeply and comprehensively. We have a professional editing team covering multiple disciplines. With our profound disciplinary background and rich polishing experience, we can significantly optimize all paper modules including the discussion, effectively improve the fluency and rigor of your articles, and make your scientific research results consistent, with its value reflected more clearly. We are always committed to ensuring the quality of papers according to the standards of top journals, improving the publishing efficiency of scientific researchers, and helping you on the road to academic success. Check us out here !  

Type in wordcount for Standard Total: USD EUR JPY Follow this link if your manuscript is longer than 12,000 words. Upload  

References:   

• Masic, I. (2018). How to write an efficient discussion? Medical Archives , 72(3), 306. https://doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2018.72.306-307  
• Şanlı, Ö., Erdem, S., & Tefik, T. (2014). How to write a discussion section? Urology Research & Practice , 39(1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2013.049  

Navigating “Chinglish” Errors in Academic English Writing

A Guide to Crafting Shorter, Impactful Sentences in Academic Writing

You may also like.

Submission 101: What format should be used for academic papers?

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

A Must-see for Researchers! How to Ensure Inclusivity in Your Scientific Writing

Make Hook, Line, and Sinker: The Art of Crafting Engaging Introductions

Can Describing Study Limitations Improve the Quality of Your Paper?

How to Write Clear and Crisp Civil Engineering Papers? Here are 5 Key Tips to Consider

The Clear Path to An Impactful Paper: ②

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Crack the Code: A Simple Guide to Reading Scientific Articles

By Jin Chow

Co-founder of Polygence, Forbes 30 Under 30 for Education

6 minute read

Science articles and research papers might seem like a maze of complicated words and confusing graphs, especially when you’re new to them, but fear not! We're here to help you decode these treasure troves of knowledge and learn how to read a scientific article. Initially, it’s important not to approach a scientific article or scientific literature like a textbook, where you read without pause for reflection. 

It’s highly recommended that you highlight and jot down notes as you navigate the scientific research article. Taking notes while you read scientific papers keeps you on track and enhances comprehension. Now, let’s dive into the exciting world of reading scientific articles step by step as well as make it easier to decide if you are going to use scientific journals in your research. 

Do your own research through Polygence!

Polygence pairs you with an expert mentor in your area of passion. Together, you work to create a high quality research project that is uniquely your own.

1. Unveil the Mystery: Title & Abstract 

Imagine you're about to embark on an adventure. Start by reading the title and abstract of the scientific research paper – they're like your treasure map! The title gives you a sneak peek of the scientific paper, while the abstract sums up the whole journey in a few sentences. The abstract of the journal article is like the trailer for a movie, giving you an idea of what to expect without revealing all the details. 

When reading an abstract, focus on the main objective of the study, the key findings, and any major implications as well as limitations. Skimming articles for research also helps you determine if the article aligns with your interests or research, especially when dealing with multiple lengthy articles. 

2. Connect the Dots: Discussion or Conclusion 

Now, let’s dive into the deep waters of either the discussion or the conclusion section. If the article is about a topic you know, head straight to the discussion to find out what all the fuss is about. Scientists chat about their findings and what they mean for the world. It’s like getting to the end of a mystery novel and revealing the solution! 

If the topic is new to you, follow the path of the conclusion. Think of it as the last chapter of a fantastic story. Scientists sum up their journey, tell you what they learned, and suggest where the adventure might lead next. It’s your chance to grasp the big picture without delving into all 

the scientific jargon. Pay attention to any limitations the scientists mention; this shows their honesty and helps you understand the study’s scope. 

3. The Recipe of Discovery: Methods 

If you’re diving into a topic you’re familiar with, start with the methods section. Imagine this as your secret recipe for a scientific experiment. Scientists spill the beans on how they conducted their research – what tools they used, how they gathered data, and more. It’s like peeking into a magician’s hat to learn their tricks! Don’t worry if you don’t understand every technical term; the goal is to get a general idea of how the study was conducted. 

4. The Opening Act: Introduction 

But if the topic is new, begin with the introduction. This is like the opening act of a play. Scientists tell you what they’re exploring and why it matters. It’s your chance to understand the questions they’re trying to answer and why those questions are exciting. Pay attention to any prior research they reference, as this will help you understand the foundation of their study.

Tip: As you read the introduction, jot down key points, questions, and any connections you make with your existing knowledge. Seek definitions for pivotal concepts. If the study involves specialized terms, the introduction might provide definitions or explanations to ensure readers understand them. Maintain these on sticky notes or separate paper for reference, aiding your assimilation of the article’s contents as these words will often appear throughout the article. 

5. The Heart of the Journey: Results 

The results section is where the heart of the journey lies. Scientists unveil what they found, often using graphs, charts, or tables. These are like the clues in a treasure hunt – they show you the evidence behind the discoveries. Look for patterns, trends, and any significant differences. Remember, it’s okay to take your time and go back to the methods section if you need to clarify how the data was collected. Don’t worry if you’re not sure about everything – even scientists take time to piece it all together! 

A proven college admissions edge

Polygence alumni had a 90% admissions rate to R1 universities in 2023. Polygence provides high schoolers a personalized, flexible research experience proven to boost your admission odds. Get matched to a mentor now!"

6. Deciding to Use the Article 

After reading through these sections, you’ll have a better understanding of the study. Now, it’s time to decide whether the article is useful for your needs. Ask yourself if the research addresses your questions or supports your ideas. Consider whether the methods used are appropriate and if the conclusions are supported by the evidence presented. Remember, not all articles will be a perfect fit, and that’s okay. Each piece of the puzzle you encounter adds to your knowledge and critical thinking skills. 

7. Embrace the Adventure: Take Your Time 

Remember, you're not racing against time. Take your time to absorb the information. If you find unfamiliar words, don't worry. Use a dictionary or ask your teacher for help. Like any great adventure, understanding comes with practice. 

8. Join the Scientific Expedition: Ask Questions 

Are questions popping up? Don’t hesitate to ask! Talk to your teachers, classmates, or even online communities. Science is all about curiosity, and questions are your superpower. Or you can use those questions for your research – they might lead you to a new adventure! 

9. Verify the Sources: Check Citations 

Examine references to see if the authors are building upon previous work and how their study fits into the broader scientific context. 

10. Take Notes 

Summarize key points and your understanding of the article. Note any questions or areas that need further exploration. 

Next Steps with Polygence

Congratulations! You’ve just uncovered the secrets of reading scientific articles, one step at a time. So, dear explorers, arm yourself with curiosity and embark on the journey of reading scientific articles. Reading top neuroscience journals , medical journals , and scientific articles might feel like a journey into the unknown, but with the right approach, it becomes an exciting adventure. 

Start with the abstract to get a sense of the study’s purpose, then dive into the discussion or conclusion. Then uncover the methods or introduction depending on your familiarity with the topic. Explore the results and graphs like a treasure map. 

As you read more articles, you’ll become more skilled at deciphering their secrets and unlocking the wealth of knowledge they hold. From there, you can explore how to potentially publish and showcase your own research article . Happy reading, intrepid young scientists!

• Article Information

Data Sharing Statement

• As Ozempic’s Popularity Soars, Here’s What to Know About Semaglutide and Weight Loss JAMA Medical News & Perspectives May 16, 2023 This Medical News article discusses chronic weight management with semaglutide, sold under the brand names Ozempic and Wegovy. Melissa Suran, PhD, MSJ
• Patents and Regulatory Exclusivities on GLP-1 Receptor Agonists JAMA Special Communication August 15, 2023 This Special Communication used data from the US Food and Drug Administration to analyze how manufacturers of brand-name glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have used patent and regulatory systems to extend periods of market exclusivity. Rasha Alhiary, PharmD; Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, JD, MPH; Sarah Gabriele, LLM, MBE; Reed F. Beall, PhD; S. Sean Tu, JD, PhD; William B. Feldman, MD, DPhil, MPH
• What to Know About Wegovy’s Rare but Serious Adverse Effects JAMA Medical News & Perspectives December 12, 2023 This Medical News article discusses Wegovy, Ozempic, and other GLP-1 receptor agonists used for weight management and type 2 diabetes. Kate Ruder, MSJ
• GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Gastrointestinal Adverse Events—Reply JAMA Comment & Response March 12, 2024 Ramin Rezaeianzadeh, BSc; Mohit Sodhi, MSc; Mahyar Etminan, PharmD, MSc
• GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Gastrointestinal Adverse Events JAMA Comment & Response March 12, 2024 Karine Suissa, PhD; Sara J. Cromer, MD; Elisabetta Patorno, MD, DrPH
• GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Use and Risk of Postoperative Complications JAMA Research Letter May 21, 2024 This cohort study evaluates the risk of postoperative respiratory complications among patients with diabetes undergoing surgery who had vs those who had not a prescription fill for glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists. Anjali A. Dixit, MD, MPH; Brian T. Bateman, MD, MS; Mary T. Hawn, MD, MPH; Michelle C. Odden, PhD; Eric C. Sun, MD, PhD
• Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Use and Risk of Gallbladder and Biliary Diseases JAMA Internal Medicine Original Investigation May 1, 2022 This systematic review and meta-analysis of 76 randomized clinical trials examines the effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist use on the risk of gallbladder and biliary diseases. Liyun He, MM; Jialu Wang, MM; Fan Ping, MD; Na Yang, MM; Jingyue Huang, MM; Yuxiu Li, MD; Lingling Xu, MD; Wei Li, MD; Huabing Zhang, MD
• Cholecystitis Associated With the Use of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists JAMA Internal Medicine Research Letter October 1, 2022 This case series identifies cases reported in the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System of acute cholecystitis associated with use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists that did not have gallbladder disease warnings in their labeling. Daniel Woronow, MD; Christine Chamberlain, PharmD; Ali Niak, MD; Mark Avigan, MDCM; Monika Houstoun, PharmD, MPH; Cindy Kortepeter, PharmD

See More About

Select your interests.

Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.

• Academic Medicine
• Acid Base, Electrolytes, Fluids
• Allergy and Clinical Immunology
• American Indian or Alaska Natives
• Anesthesiology
• Anticoagulation
• Art and Images in Psychiatry
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assisted Reproduction
• Bleeding and Transfusion
• Caring for the Critically Ill Patient
• Challenges in Clinical Electrocardiography
• Climate and Health
• Climate Change
• Clinical Challenge
• Clinical Decision Support
• Clinical Implications of Basic Neuroscience
• Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Consensus Statements
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Critical Care Medicine
• Cultural Competency
• Dental Medicine
• Dermatology
• Diabetes and Endocrinology
• Diagnostic Test Interpretation
• Drug Development
• Electronic Health Records
• Emergency Medicine
• End of Life, Hospice, Palliative Care
• Environmental Health
• Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
• Facial Plastic Surgery
• Gastroenterology and Hepatology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Genomics and Precision Health
• Global Health
• Guide to Statistics and Methods
• Hair Disorders
• Health Care Delivery Models
• Health Care Economics, Insurance, Payment
• Health Care Quality
• Health Care Reform
• Health Care Safety
• Health Care Workforce
• Health Disparities
• Health Inequities
• Health Policy
• Health Systems Science
• History of Medicine
• Hypertension
• Images in Neurology
• Implementation Science
• Infectious Diseases
• Innovations in Health Care Delivery
• JAMA Infographic
• Law and Medicine
• Leading Change
• Less is More
• LGBTQIA Medicine
• Lifestyle Behaviors
• Medical Coding
• Medical Devices and Equipment
• Medical Education
• Medical Education and Training
• Medical Journals and Publishing
• Mobile Health and Telemedicine
• Narrative Medicine
• Neuroscience and Psychiatry
• Notable Notes
• Nutrition, Obesity, Exercise
• Obstetrics and Gynecology
• Occupational Health
• Ophthalmology
• Orthopedics
• Otolaryngology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Care
• Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
• Patient Care
• Patient Information
• Performance Improvement
• Performance Measures
• Perioperative Care and Consultation
• Pharmacoeconomics
• Pharmacoepidemiology
• Pharmacogenetics
• Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology
• Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
• Physical Therapy
• Physician Leadership
• Population Health
• Primary Care
• Professional Well-being
• Professionalism
• Psychiatry and Behavioral Health
• Public Health
• Pulmonary Medicine
• Regulatory Agencies
• Reproductive Health
• Research, Methods, Statistics
• Resuscitation
• Rheumatology
• Risk Management
• Scientific Discovery and the Future of Medicine
• Shared Decision Making and Communication
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports Medicine
• Stem Cell Transplantation
• Substance Use and Addiction Medicine
• Surgical Innovation
• Surgical Pearls
• Teachable Moment
• Technology and Finance
• The Art of JAMA
• The Arts and Medicine
• The Rational Clinical Examination
• Tobacco and e-Cigarettes
• Translational Medicine
• Trauma and Injury
• Treatment Adherence
• Ultrasonography
• Users' Guide to the Medical Literature
• Vaccination
• Venous Thromboembolism
• Veterans Health
• Women's Health
• Workflow and Process
• Wound Care, Infection, Healing

Others Also Liked

• Download PDF
• X Facebook More LinkedIn

Sodhi M , Rezaeianzadeh R , Kezouh A , Etminan M. Risk of Gastrointestinal Adverse Events Associated With Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists for Weight Loss. JAMA. 2023;330(18):1795–1797. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.19574

Manage citations:

© 2024

• Permissions

Risk of Gastrointestinal Adverse Events Associated With Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists for Weight Loss

• 1 Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
• 2 StatExpert Ltd, Laval, Quebec, Canada
• 3 Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences and Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
• Medical News & Perspectives As Ozempic’s Popularity Soars, Here’s What to Know About Semaglutide and Weight Loss Melissa Suran, PhD, MSJ JAMA
• Special Communication Patents and Regulatory Exclusivities on GLP-1 Receptor Agonists Rasha Alhiary, PharmD; Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, JD, MPH; Sarah Gabriele, LLM, MBE; Reed F. Beall, PhD; S. Sean Tu, JD, PhD; William B. Feldman, MD, DPhil, MPH JAMA
• Medical News & Perspectives What to Know About Wegovy’s Rare but Serious Adverse Effects Kate Ruder, MSJ JAMA
• Comment & Response GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Gastrointestinal Adverse Events—Reply Ramin Rezaeianzadeh, BSc; Mohit Sodhi, MSc; Mahyar Etminan, PharmD, MSc JAMA
• Comment & Response GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Gastrointestinal Adverse Events Karine Suissa, PhD; Sara J. Cromer, MD; Elisabetta Patorno, MD, DrPH JAMA
• Research Letter GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Use and Risk of Postoperative Complications Anjali A. Dixit, MD, MPH; Brian T. Bateman, MD, MS; Mary T. Hawn, MD, MPH; Michelle C. Odden, PhD; Eric C. Sun, MD, PhD JAMA
• Original Investigation Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Use and Risk of Gallbladder and Biliary Diseases Liyun He, MM; Jialu Wang, MM; Fan Ping, MD; Na Yang, MM; Jingyue Huang, MM; Yuxiu Li, MD; Lingling Xu, MD; Wei Li, MD; Huabing Zhang, MD JAMA Internal Medicine
• Research Letter Cholecystitis Associated With the Use of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists Daniel Woronow, MD; Christine Chamberlain, PharmD; Ali Niak, MD; Mark Avigan, MDCM; Monika Houstoun, PharmD, MPH; Cindy Kortepeter, PharmD JAMA Internal Medicine

Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists are medications approved for treatment of diabetes that recently have also been used off label for weight loss. 1 Studies have found increased risks of gastrointestinal adverse events (biliary disease, 2 pancreatitis, 3 bowel obstruction, 4 and gastroparesis 5 ) in patients with diabetes. 2 - 5 Because such patients have higher baseline risk for gastrointestinal adverse events, risk in patients taking these drugs for other indications may differ. Randomized trials examining efficacy of GLP-1 agonists for weight loss were not designed to capture these events 2 due to small sample sizes and short follow-up. We examined gastrointestinal adverse events associated with GLP-1 agonists used for weight loss in a clinical setting.

We used a random sample of 16 million patients (2006-2020) from the PharMetrics Plus for Academics database (IQVIA), a large health claims database that captures 93% of all outpatient prescriptions and physician diagnoses in the US through the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) or ICD-10. In our cohort study, we included new users of semaglutide or liraglutide, 2 main GLP-1 agonists, and the active comparator bupropion-naltrexone, a weight loss agent unrelated to GLP-1 agonists. Because semaglutide was marketed for weight loss after the study period (2021), we ensured all GLP-1 agonist and bupropion-naltrexone users had an obesity code in the 90 days prior or up to 30 days after cohort entry, excluding those with a diabetes or antidiabetic drug code.

Patients were observed from first prescription of a study drug to first mutually exclusive incidence (defined as first ICD-9 or ICD-10 code) of biliary disease (including cholecystitis, cholelithiasis, and choledocholithiasis), pancreatitis (including gallstone pancreatitis), bowel obstruction, or gastroparesis (defined as use of a code or a promotility agent). They were followed up to the end of the study period (June 2020) or censored during a switch. Hazard ratios (HRs) from a Cox model were adjusted for age, sex, alcohol use, smoking, hyperlipidemia, abdominal surgery in the previous 30 days, and geographic location, which were identified as common cause variables or risk factors. 6 Two sensitivity analyses were undertaken, one excluding hyperlipidemia (because more semaglutide users had hyperlipidemia) and another including patients without diabetes regardless of having an obesity code. Due to absence of data on body mass index (BMI), the E-value was used to examine how strong unmeasured confounding would need to be to negate observed results, with E-value HRs of at least 2 indicating BMI is unlikely to change study results. Statistical significance was defined as 2-sided 95% CI that did not cross 1. Analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4. Ethics approval was obtained by the University of British Columbia’s clinical research ethics board with a waiver of informed consent.

Our cohort included 4144 liraglutide, 613 semaglutide, and 654 bupropion-naltrexone users. Incidence rates for the 4 outcomes were elevated among GLP-1 agonists compared with bupropion-naltrexone users ( Table 1 ). For example, incidence of biliary disease (per 1000 person-years) was 11.7 for semaglutide, 18.6 for liraglutide, and 12.6 for bupropion-naltrexone and 4.6, 7.9, and 1.0, respectively, for pancreatitis.

Use of GLP-1 agonists compared with bupropion-naltrexone was associated with increased risk of pancreatitis (adjusted HR, 9.09 [95% CI, 1.25-66.00]), bowel obstruction (HR, 4.22 [95% CI, 1.02-17.40]), and gastroparesis (HR, 3.67 [95% CI, 1.15-11.90) but not biliary disease (HR, 1.50 [95% CI, 0.89-2.53]). Exclusion of hyperlipidemia from the analysis did not change the results ( Table 2 ). Inclusion of GLP-1 agonists regardless of history of obesity reduced HRs and narrowed CIs but did not change the significance of the results ( Table 2 ). E-value HRs did not suggest potential confounding by BMI.

This study found that use of GLP-1 agonists for weight loss compared with use of bupropion-naltrexone was associated with increased risk of pancreatitis, gastroparesis, and bowel obstruction but not biliary disease.

Given the wide use of these drugs, these adverse events, although rare, must be considered by patients who are contemplating using the drugs for weight loss because the risk-benefit calculus for this group might differ from that of those who use them for diabetes. Limitations include that although all GLP-1 agonist users had a record for obesity without diabetes, whether GLP-1 agonists were all used for weight loss is uncertain.

Accepted for Publication: September 11, 2023.

Published Online: October 5, 2023. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.19574

Correction: This article was corrected on December 21, 2023, to update the full name of the database used.

Corresponding Author: Mahyar Etminan, PharmD, MSc, Faculty of Medicine, Departments of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences and Medicine, The Eye Care Center, University of British Columbia, 2550 Willow St, Room 323, Vancouver, BC V5Z 3N9, Canada ( [email protected] ).

Author Contributions: Dr Etminan had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Sodhi, Rezaeianzadeh, Etminan.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.

Drafting of the manuscript: Sodhi, Rezaeianzadeh, Etminan.

Critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Kezouh.

Obtained funding: Etminan.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Sodhi.

Supervision: Etminan.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Funding/Support: This study was funded by internal research funds from the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement .

• Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
• Access PDFs of free articles
• Manage your interests
• Save searches and receive search alerts

Charting an equitable future for DNA and ancient DNA research in Africa

New paper sets a vision for how to achieve equitable genomics research in africa in ten years' time.

Today, the American Journal of Human Genetics published a perspective piece on the need for an equitable and inclusive future for DNA and ancient DNA (aDNA) research in Africa. The paper, coauthored by an international team of 36 scientists from Africa, North America, Asia, Australia, and Europe, was led by Dr. Elizabeth (Ebeth) Sawchuk of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History and Dr. Kendra Sirak of Harvard University.

DNA from ancient and living African peoples is critical for researchers studying our species' evolution and population history. Africa is home to the greatest human genetic diversity on the planet, and only a fraction of that diversity has been studied to date. However, with scientific advances over the past decade, the situation is changing rapidly. More genomic data from ancient and living African people are published every year, and African DNA and aDNA research is poised to dramatically increase in the next decade. Yet, despite growing international research interest in Africa, African scientists remain starkly underrepresented on research teams and in the process of planning and executing scientific projects.

"Step one is to discuss African research in Africa," says Dr. Sawchuk, the Cleveland Museum of Natural History's Associate Curator of Human Evolution. "Many African scholars face major barriers to attending genetics conferences held in North America and Europe, limiting their ability to lead and partner in DNA and aDNA research. Holding conversations in Africa allows voices and perspectives that have been historically sidelined to be heard."

This new paper is one outcome of the groundbreaking "DNAirobi" workshop held at the National Museums of Kenya in May 2023 and co-organized by scientists at the Cleveland Museum of Natural History, National Museums of Kenya, Harvard University, and Rice University. DNAirobi brought together geneticists, archaeologists, and educators from across Africa and around the world to discuss the future of population history-focused DNA and aDNA research on the continent. The article captures the results of these conversations and presents a bold vision for what the research landscape should look like in ten years' time.

"This study involved researchers from both the Global North and the Global South and underscores the potential DNA and ancient DNA hold for understanding ancient and modern human populations" said Dr. Fredrick Kyalo Manthi, Director of Antiquities, Sites and Monuments for the National Museums of Kenya. "It amplifies the need to train more African scholars, particularly in studies related to ancient DNA."

The article also acknowledges and addresses the challenges associated with DNA and aDNA research in Africa and beyond. Studying genetic sequences, whether modern or ancient, requires great care because such research can impact both the living and the dead. Scholars widely agree that such work should be the product of equitable partnerships, engage diverse audiences (including communities relevant to research), encompass a range of perspectives, and create opportunities for capacity building. A growing number of papers over the past decade have focused on the ethics of genetics research, yet it remains difficult to adapt general best practice recommendations to specific geographic contexts. Developing a roadmap for ethical DNA and aDNA research in Africa is particularly challenging because fewer studies have been done on the continent and guidelines developed in other parts of the world are not always a good fit.

However, the new paper goes beyond creating an Africa-specific set of guidelines for genomic research. "We all want to carry out research that is equitable, engaged, and inclusive," said Dr. Sirak, Research Associate in the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University. "Our paper examines some of the structural barriers that currently stand in the way of creating a research ecosystem that facilitates this type of research -- for example, a lack of accessible training opportunities, ineffective communication between scientists and the interested public, and a history of exploitative research practices on the African continent. We attempt to articulate how we as researchers can encourage the continued growth of ethical genomics research in Africa with high-level structural changes to the way that science is designed and supported, that we know must ultimately take place."

Ultimately, there is no singular path forward for DNA and aDNA research in Africa. Instead, as research landscapes evolve alongside science and society, scholars will need to remain flexible and adapt to new challenges and opportunities. To help with this process, the paper's authors identify several "landmarks" to guide teams toward an equitable and inclusive future for genomics research. These include changing how and with whom we communicate results, reimagining what equitable partnerships look like, and focusing on improving scientific literacy for all. Effectively implementing best practices for ethical DNA and aDNA research requires addressing deep imbalances in power and resources.

"We seek to build a dynamic research ecosystem in which African scholars can effectively lead and partner in genomics research, and access the collaborators, labs, and funding they need to achieve their goals" said Dr. Christine Ogola, Head of Archaeology at the National Museums of Kenya. "The solution is not to immediately build population history-focused DNA and aDNA labs on the continent, which would be unrealistic at present to staff and maintain. Instead, we need to focus on building capacity and infrastructure in ways that sustainably support research leadership."

The authors conclude the article with a call to action for labs and funding bodies to commit more resources to African scholars, either directly or in cooperation with institutions that provide training and capacity building opportunities. There is a fundamental tension between fast genomics research driven by labs that must generate and publish results to secure funding, and the slow work of meaningfully engaging communities to build trust and equitable partnerships. Until there is infrastructural support to create the desired equitable research ecosystem, it will remain challenging to implement best practices for African DNA and aDNA research.

"Africans are the primary knowledge holders of African samples, data, and historical contexts. We want more access to DNA and aDNA research and the resources and training to support more African-led studies in the future" says Dr. Emmanuel Ndiema, Head of Earth Sciences for the National Museums of Kenya. "An ethical and equitable future for African genomics research requires investing in entire societies and the next generation of scholars, work that will take decades and have impacts that go far beyond genetics research."

• Human Biology
• Alzheimer's Research
• Racial Disparity
• STEM Education
• Travel and Recreation
• Environmental Policies
• Introduction to genetics
• DNA microarray
• Genetically modified organism
• Molecular biology

Story Source:

Materials provided by Cleveland Museum of Natural History . Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• Elizabeth A. Sawchuk, Kendra A. Sirak, Fredrick K. Manthi, Emmanuel K. Ndiema, Christine A. Ogola, Mary E. Prendergast, David Reich, Eva Aluvaala, George Ayodo, Lamine Badji, Nancy Bird, Wendy Black, Rosa Fregel, Njeri Gachihi, Victoria E. Gibbon, Agness Gidna, Steven T. Goldstein, Reem Hamad, Hisham Y. Hassan, Vanessa M. Hayes, Garrett Hellenthal, Solomon Kebede, Abdikadir Kurewa, Chapurukha Kusimba, Elizabeth Kyazike, Paul J. Lane, Scott MacEachern, Diyendo Massilani, Emma Mbua, Alan G. Morris, Christina Mutinda, Freda Nkirote M’Mbogori, Austin W. Reynolds, Sarah Tishkoff, Miguel Vilar, Getnet Yimer. Charting a landmark-driven path forward for population genetics and ancient DNA research in Africa . The American Journal of Human Genetics , 2024; 111 (7): 1243 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.05.019

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• How Water Controls Speed of Muscle Contraction
• Forest Carbon Storage Declined: Drought, Fire
• Neanderthals and Other Ancient Humans Together
• Treating White-Nose Syndrome in Bats
• How Galaxy 'Heart and Lungs' Extend Its Life
• Downfall of Stone Age Farmers: The Plague
• Insight Into One of Life's Earliest Ancestors
• Hydrogen Flight Looks Ready for Take-Off
• Dark Matter in Dwarf Galaxy Tracked
• 52,000-Year-Old Woolly Mammoth Chromosomes

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Yale J Biol Med
• v.84(3); 2011 Sep

Focus: Education — Career Advice

How to write your first research paper.

Writing a research manuscript is an intimidating process for many novice writers in the sciences. One of the stumbling blocks is the beginning of the process and creating the first draft. This paper presents guidelines on how to initiate the writing process and draft each section of a research manuscript. The paper discusses seven rules that allow the writer to prepare a well-structured and comprehensive manuscript for a publication submission. In addition, the author lists different strategies for successful revision. Each of those strategies represents a step in the revision process and should help the writer improve the quality of the manuscript. The paper could be considered a brief manual for publication.

It is late at night. You have been struggling with your project for a year. You generated an enormous amount of interesting data. Your pipette feels like an extension of your hand, and running western blots has become part of your daily routine, similar to brushing your teeth. Your colleagues think you are ready to write a paper, and your lab mates tease you about your “slow” writing progress. Yet days pass, and you cannot force yourself to sit down to write. You have not written anything for a while (lab reports do not count), and you feel you have lost your stamina. How does the writing process work? How can you fit your writing into a daily schedule packed with experiments? What section should you start with? What distinguishes a good research paper from a bad one? How should you revise your paper? These and many other questions buzz in your head and keep you stressed. As a result, you procrastinate. In this paper, I will discuss the issues related to the writing process of a scientific paper. Specifically, I will focus on the best approaches to start a scientific paper, tips for writing each section, and the best revision strategies.

1. Schedule your writing time in Outlook

Whether you have written 100 papers or you are struggling with your first, starting the process is the most difficult part unless you have a rigid writing schedule. Writing is hard. It is a very difficult process of intense concentration and brain work. As stated in Hayes’ framework for the study of writing: “It is a generative activity requiring motivation, and it is an intellectual activity requiring cognitive processes and memory” [ 1 ]. In his book How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing , Paul Silvia says that for some, “it’s easier to embalm the dead than to write an article about it” [ 2 ]. Just as with any type of hard work, you will not succeed unless you practice regularly. If you have not done physical exercises for a year, only regular workouts can get you into good shape again. The same kind of regular exercises, or I call them “writing sessions,” are required to be a productive author. Choose from 1- to 2-hour blocks in your daily work schedule and consider them as non-cancellable appointments. When figuring out which blocks of time will be set for writing, you should select the time that works best for this type of work. For many people, mornings are more productive. One Yale University graduate student spent a semester writing from 8 a.m. to 9 a.m. when her lab was empty. At the end of the semester, she was amazed at how much she accomplished without even interrupting her regular lab hours. In addition, doing the hardest task first thing in the morning contributes to the sense of accomplishment during the rest of the day. This positive feeling spills over into our work and life and has a very positive effect on our overall attitude.

Rule 1: Create regular time blocks for writing as appointments in your calendar and keep these appointments.

2. start with an outline.

Now that you have scheduled time, you need to decide how to start writing. The best strategy is to start with an outline. This will not be an outline that you are used to, with Roman numerals for each section and neat parallel listing of topic sentences and supporting points. This outline will be similar to a template for your paper. Initially, the outline will form a structure for your paper; it will help generate ideas and formulate hypotheses. Following the advice of George M. Whitesides, “. . . start with a blank piece of paper, and write down, in any order, all important ideas that occur to you concerning the paper” [ 3 ]. Use Table 1 as a starting point for your outline. Include your visuals (figures, tables, formulas, equations, and algorithms), and list your findings. These will constitute the first level of your outline, which will eventually expand as you elaborate.

The next stage is to add context and structure. Here you will group all your ideas into sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion/Conclusion ( Table 2 ). This step will help add coherence to your work and sift your ideas.

Now that you have expanded your outline, you are ready for the next step: discussing the ideas for your paper with your colleagues and mentor. Many universities have a writing center where graduate students can schedule individual consultations and receive assistance with their paper drafts. Getting feedback during early stages of your draft can save a lot of time. Talking through ideas allows people to conceptualize and organize thoughts to find their direction without wasting time on unnecessary writing. Outlining is the most effective way of communicating your ideas and exchanging thoughts. Moreover, it is also the best stage to decide to which publication you will submit the paper. Many people come up with three choices and discuss them with their mentors and colleagues. Having a list of journal priorities can help you quickly resubmit your paper if your paper is rejected.

Rule 2: Create a detailed outline and discuss it with your mentor and peers.

3. continue with drafts.

After you get enough feedback and decide on the journal you will submit to, the process of real writing begins. Copy your outline into a separate file and expand on each of the points, adding data and elaborating on the details. When you create the first draft, do not succumb to the temptation of editing. Do not slow down to choose a better word or better phrase; do not halt to improve your sentence structure. Pour your ideas into the paper and leave revision and editing for later. As Paul Silvia explains, “Revising while you generate text is like drinking decaffeinated coffee in the early morning: noble idea, wrong time” [ 2 ].

Many students complain that they are not productive writers because they experience writer’s block. Staring at an empty screen is frustrating, but your screen is not really empty: You have a template of your article, and all you need to do is fill in the blanks. Indeed, writer’s block is a logical fallacy for a scientist ― it is just an excuse to procrastinate. When scientists start writing a research paper, they already have their files with data, lab notes with materials and experimental designs, some visuals, and tables with results. All they need to do is scrutinize these pieces and put them together into a comprehensive paper.

3.1. Starting with Materials and Methods

If you still struggle with starting a paper, then write the Materials and Methods section first. Since you have all your notes, it should not be problematic for you to describe the experimental design and procedures. Your most important goal in this section is to be as explicit as possible by providing enough detail and references. In the end, the purpose of this section is to allow other researchers to evaluate and repeat your work. So do not run into the same problems as the writers of the sentences in (1):

1a. Bacteria were pelleted by centrifugation. 1b. To isolate T cells, lymph nodes were collected.

As you can see, crucial pieces of information are missing: the speed of centrifuging your bacteria, the time, and the temperature in (1a); the source of lymph nodes for collection in (b). The sentences can be improved when information is added, as in (2a) and (2b), respectfully:

2a. Bacteria were pelleted by centrifugation at 3000g for 15 min at 25°C. 2b. To isolate T cells, mediastinal and mesenteric lymph nodes from Balb/c mice were collected at day 7 after immunization with ovabumin.

If your method has previously been published and is well-known, then you should provide only the literature reference, as in (3a). If your method is unpublished, then you need to make sure you provide all essential details, as in (3b).

3a. Stem cells were isolated, according to Johnson [23]. 3b. Stem cells were isolated using biotinylated carbon nanotubes coated with anti-CD34 antibodies.

Furthermore, cohesion and fluency are crucial in this section. One of the malpractices resulting in disrupted fluency is switching from passive voice to active and vice versa within the same paragraph, as shown in (4). This switching misleads and distracts the reader.

4. Behavioral computer-based experiments of Study 1 were programmed by using E-Prime. We took ratings of enjoyment, mood, and arousal as the patients listened to preferred pleasant music and unpreferred music by using Visual Analogue Scales (SI Methods). The preferred and unpreferred status of the music was operationalized along a continuum of pleasantness [ 4 ].

The problem with (4) is that the reader has to switch from the point of view of the experiment (passive voice) to the point of view of the experimenter (active voice). This switch causes confusion about the performer of the actions in the first and the third sentences. To improve the coherence and fluency of the paragraph above, you should be consistent in choosing the point of view: first person “we” or passive voice [ 5 ]. Let’s consider two revised examples in (5).

5a. We programmed behavioral computer-based experiments of Study 1 by using E-Prime. We took ratings of enjoyment, mood, and arousal by using Visual Analogue Scales (SI Methods) as the patients listened to preferred pleasant music and unpreferred music. We operationalized the preferred and unpreferred status of the music along a continuum of pleasantness. 5b. Behavioral computer-based experiments of Study 1 were programmed by using E-Prime. Ratings of enjoyment, mood, and arousal were taken as the patients listened to preferred pleasant music and unpreferred music by using Visual Analogue Scales (SI Methods). The preferred and unpreferred status of the music was operationalized along a continuum of pleasantness.

If you choose the point of view of the experimenter, then you may end up with repetitive “we did this” sentences. For many readers, paragraphs with sentences all beginning with “we” may also sound disruptive. So if you choose active sentences, you need to keep the number of “we” subjects to a minimum and vary the beginnings of the sentences [ 6 ].

Interestingly, recent studies have reported that the Materials and Methods section is the only section in research papers in which passive voice predominantly overrides the use of the active voice [ 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 ]. For example, Martínez shows a significant drop in active voice use in the Methods sections based on the corpus of 1 million words of experimental full text research articles in the biological sciences [ 7 ]. According to the author, the active voice patterned with “we” is used only as a tool to reveal personal responsibility for the procedural decisions in designing and performing experimental work. This means that while all other sections of the research paper use active voice, passive voice is still the most predominant in Materials and Methods sections.

Writing Materials and Methods sections is a meticulous and time consuming task requiring extreme accuracy and clarity. This is why when you complete your draft, you should ask for as much feedback from your colleagues as possible. Numerous readers of this section will help you identify the missing links and improve the technical style of this section.

Rule 3: Be meticulous and accurate in describing the Materials and Methods. Do not change the point of view within one paragraph.

3.2. writing results section.

For many authors, writing the Results section is more intimidating than writing the Materials and Methods section . If people are interested in your paper, they are interested in your results. That is why it is vital to use all your writing skills to objectively present your key findings in an orderly and logical sequence using illustrative materials and text.

Your Results should be organized into different segments or subsections where each one presents the purpose of the experiment, your experimental approach, data including text and visuals (tables, figures, schematics, algorithms, and formulas), and data commentary. For most journals, your data commentary will include a meaningful summary of the data presented in the visuals and an explanation of the most significant findings. This data presentation should not repeat the data in the visuals, but rather highlight the most important points. In the “standard” research paper approach, your Results section should exclude data interpretation, leaving it for the Discussion section. However, interpretations gradually and secretly creep into research papers: “Reducing the data, generalizing from the data, and highlighting scientific cases are all highly interpretive processes. It should be clear by now that we do not let the data speak for themselves in research reports; in summarizing our results, we interpret them for the reader” [ 10 ]. As a result, many journals including the Journal of Experimental Medicine and the Journal of Clinical Investigation use joint Results/Discussion sections, where results are immediately followed by interpretations.

Another important aspect of this section is to create a comprehensive and supported argument or a well-researched case. This means that you should be selective in presenting data and choose only those experimental details that are essential for your reader to understand your findings. You might have conducted an experiment 20 times and collected numerous records, but this does not mean that you should present all those records in your paper. You need to distinguish your results from your data and be able to discard excessive experimental details that could distract and confuse the reader. However, creating a picture or an argument should not be confused with data manipulation or falsification, which is a willful distortion of data and results. If some of your findings contradict your ideas, you have to mention this and find a plausible explanation for the contradiction.

In addition, your text should not include irrelevant and peripheral information, including overview sentences, as in (6).

6. To show our results, we first introduce all components of experimental system and then describe the outcome of infections.

Indeed, wordiness convolutes your sentences and conceals your ideas from readers. One common source of wordiness is unnecessary intensifiers. Adverbial intensifiers such as “clearly,” “essential,” “quite,” “basically,” “rather,” “fairly,” “really,” and “virtually” not only add verbosity to your sentences, but also lower your results’ credibility. They appeal to the reader’s emotions but lower objectivity, as in the common examples in (7):

7a. Table 3 clearly shows that … 7b. It is obvious from figure 4 that …

Another source of wordiness is nominalizations, i.e., nouns derived from verbs and adjectives paired with weak verbs including “be,” “have,” “do,” “make,” “cause,” “provide,” and “get” and constructions such as “there is/are.”

8a. We tested the hypothesis that there is a disruption of membrane asymmetry. 8b. In this paper we provide an argument that stem cells repopulate injured organs.

In the sentences above, the abstract nominalizations “disruption” and “argument” do not contribute to the clarity of the sentences, but rather clutter them with useless vocabulary that distracts from the meaning. To improve your sentences, avoid unnecessary nominalizations and change passive verbs and constructions into active and direct sentences.

9a. We tested the hypothesis that the membrane asymmetry is disrupted. 9b. In this paper we argue that stem cells repopulate injured organs.

Your Results section is the heart of your paper, representing a year or more of your daily research. So lead your reader through your story by writing direct, concise, and clear sentences.

Rule 4: Be clear, concise, and objective in describing your Results.

3.3. now it is time for your introduction.

Now that you are almost half through drafting your research paper, it is time to update your outline. While describing your Methods and Results, many of you diverged from the original outline and re-focused your ideas. So before you move on to create your Introduction, re-read your Methods and Results sections and change your outline to match your research focus. The updated outline will help you review the general picture of your paper, the topic, the main idea, and the purpose, which are all important for writing your introduction.

The best way to structure your introduction is to follow the three-move approach shown in Table 3 .

Adapted from Swales and Feak [ 11 ].

The moves and information from your outline can help to create your Introduction efficiently and without missing steps. These moves are traffic signs that lead the reader through the road of your ideas. Each move plays an important role in your paper and should be presented with deep thought and care. When you establish the territory, you place your research in context and highlight the importance of your research topic. By finding the niche, you outline the scope of your research problem and enter the scientific dialogue. The final move, “occupying the niche,” is where you explain your research in a nutshell and highlight your paper’s significance. The three moves allow your readers to evaluate their interest in your paper and play a significant role in the paper review process, determining your paper reviewers.

Some academic writers assume that the reader “should follow the paper” to find the answers about your methodology and your findings. As a result, many novice writers do not present their experimental approach and the major findings, wrongly believing that the reader will locate the necessary information later while reading the subsequent sections [ 5 ]. However, this “suspense” approach is not appropriate for scientific writing. To interest the reader, scientific authors should be direct and straightforward and present informative one-sentence summaries of the results and the approach.

Another problem is that writers understate the significance of the Introduction. Many new researchers mistakenly think that all their readers understand the importance of the research question and omit this part. However, this assumption is faulty because the purpose of the section is not to evaluate the importance of the research question in general. The goal is to present the importance of your research contribution and your findings. Therefore, you should be explicit and clear in describing the benefit of the paper.

The Introduction should not be long. Indeed, for most journals, this is a very brief section of about 250 to 600 words, but it might be the most difficult section due to its importance.

Rule 5: Interest your reader in the Introduction section by signalling all its elements and stating the novelty of the work.

3.4. discussion of the results.

For many scientists, writing a Discussion section is as scary as starting a paper. Most of the fear comes from the variation in the section. Since every paper has its unique results and findings, the Discussion section differs in its length, shape, and structure. However, some general principles of writing this section still exist. Knowing these rules, or “moves,” can change your attitude about this section and help you create a comprehensive interpretation of your results.

The purpose of the Discussion section is to place your findings in the research context and “to explain the meaning of the findings and why they are important, without appearing arrogant, condescending, or patronizing” [ 11 ]. The structure of the first two moves is almost a mirror reflection of the one in the Introduction. In the Introduction, you zoom in from general to specific and from the background to your research question; in the Discussion section, you zoom out from the summary of your findings to the research context, as shown in Table 4 .

Adapted from Swales and Feak and Hess [ 11 , 12 ].

The biggest challenge for many writers is the opening paragraph of the Discussion section. Following the moves in Table 1 , the best choice is to start with the study’s major findings that provide the answer to the research question in your Introduction. The most common starting phrases are “Our findings demonstrate . . .,” or “In this study, we have shown that . . .,” or “Our results suggest . . .” In some cases, however, reminding the reader about the research question or even providing a brief context and then stating the answer would make more sense. This is important in those cases where the researcher presents a number of findings or where more than one research question was presented. Your summary of the study’s major findings should be followed by your presentation of the importance of these findings. One of the most frequent mistakes of the novice writer is to assume the importance of his findings. Even if the importance is clear to you, it may not be obvious to your reader. Digesting the findings and their importance to your reader is as crucial as stating your research question.

Another useful strategy is to be proactive in the first move by predicting and commenting on the alternative explanations of the results. Addressing potential doubts will save you from painful comments about the wrong interpretation of your results and will present you as a thoughtful and considerate researcher. Moreover, the evaluation of the alternative explanations might help you create a logical step to the next move of the discussion section: the research context.

The goal of the research context move is to show how your findings fit into the general picture of the current research and how you contribute to the existing knowledge on the topic. This is also the place to discuss any discrepancies and unexpected findings that may otherwise distort the general picture of your paper. Moreover, outlining the scope of your research by showing the limitations, weaknesses, and assumptions is essential and adds modesty to your image as a scientist. However, make sure that you do not end your paper with the problems that override your findings. Try to suggest feasible explanations and solutions.

If your submission does not require a separate Conclusion section, then adding another paragraph about the “take-home message” is a must. This should be a general statement reiterating your answer to the research question and adding its scientific implications, practical application, or advice.

Just as in all other sections of your paper, the clear and precise language and concise comprehensive sentences are vital. However, in addition to that, your writing should convey confidence and authority. The easiest way to illustrate your tone is to use the active voice and the first person pronouns. Accompanied by clarity and succinctness, these tools are the best to convince your readers of your point and your ideas.

Rule 6: Present the principles, relationships, and generalizations in a concise and convincing tone.

4. choosing the best working revision strategies.

Now that you have created the first draft, your attitude toward your writing should have improved. Moreover, you should feel more confident that you are able to accomplish your project and submit your paper within a reasonable timeframe. You also have worked out your writing schedule and followed it precisely. Do not stop ― you are only at the midpoint from your destination. Just as the best and most precious diamond is no more than an unattractive stone recognized only by trained professionals, your ideas and your results may go unnoticed if they are not polished and brushed. Despite your attempts to present your ideas in a logical and comprehensive way, first drafts are frequently a mess. Use the advice of Paul Silvia: “Your first drafts should sound like they were hastily translated from Icelandic by a non-native speaker” [ 2 ]. The degree of your success will depend on how you are able to revise and edit your paper.

The revision can be done at the macrostructure and the microstructure levels [ 13 ]. The macrostructure revision includes the revision of the organization, content, and flow. The microstructure level includes individual words, sentence structure, grammar, punctuation, and spelling.

The best way to approach the macrostructure revision is through the outline of the ideas in your paper. The last time you updated your outline was before writing the Introduction and the Discussion. Now that you have the beginning and the conclusion, you can take a bird’s-eye view of the whole paper. The outline will allow you to see if the ideas of your paper are coherently structured, if your results are logically built, and if the discussion is linked to the research question in the Introduction. You will be able to see if something is missing in any of the sections or if you need to rearrange your information to make your point.

The next step is to revise each of the sections starting from the beginning. Ideally, you should limit yourself to working on small sections of about five pages at a time [ 14 ]. After these short sections, your eyes get used to your writing and your efficiency in spotting problems decreases. When reading for content and organization, you should control your urge to edit your paper for sentence structure and grammar and focus only on the flow of your ideas and logic of your presentation. Experienced researchers tend to make almost three times the number of changes to meaning than novice writers [ 15 , 16 ]. Revising is a difficult but useful skill, which academic writers obtain with years of practice.

In contrast to the macrostructure revision, which is a linear process and is done usually through a detailed outline and by sections, microstructure revision is a non-linear process. While the goal of the macrostructure revision is to analyze your ideas and their logic, the goal of the microstructure editing is to scrutinize the form of your ideas: your paragraphs, sentences, and words. You do not need and are not recommended to follow the order of the paper to perform this type of revision. You can start from the end or from different sections. You can even revise by reading sentences backward, sentence by sentence and word by word.

One of the microstructure revision strategies frequently used during writing center consultations is to read the paper aloud [ 17 ]. You may read aloud to yourself, to a tape recorder, or to a colleague or friend. When reading and listening to your paper, you are more likely to notice the places where the fluency is disrupted and where you stumble because of a very long and unclear sentence or a wrong connector.

Another revision strategy is to learn your common errors and to do a targeted search for them [ 13 ]. All writers have a set of problems that are specific to them, i.e., their writing idiosyncrasies. Remembering these problems is as important for an academic writer as remembering your friends’ birthdays. Create a list of these idiosyncrasies and run a search for these problems using your word processor. If your problem is demonstrative pronouns without summary words, then search for “this/these/those” in your text and check if you used the word appropriately. If you have a problem with intensifiers, then search for “really” or “very” and delete them from the text. The same targeted search can be done to eliminate wordiness. Searching for “there is/are” or “and” can help you avoid the bulky sentences.

The final strategy is working with a hard copy and a pencil. Print a double space copy with font size 14 and re-read your paper in several steps. Try reading your paper line by line with the rest of the text covered with a piece of paper. When you are forced to see only a small portion of your writing, you are less likely to get distracted and are more likely to notice problems. You will end up spotting more unnecessary words, wrongly worded phrases, or unparallel constructions.

After you apply all these strategies, you are ready to share your writing with your friends, colleagues, and a writing advisor in the writing center. Get as much feedback as you can, especially from non-specialists in your field. Patiently listen to what others say to you ― you are not expected to defend your writing or explain what you wanted to say. You may decide what you want to change and how after you receive the feedback and sort it in your head. Even though some researchers make the revision an endless process and can hardly stop after a 14th draft; having from five to seven drafts of your paper is a norm in the sciences. If you can’t stop revising, then set a deadline for yourself and stick to it. Deadlines always help.

Rule 7: Revise your paper at the macrostructure and the microstructure level using different strategies and techniques. Receive feedback and revise again.

5. it is time to submit.

It is late at night again. You are still in your lab finishing revisions and getting ready to submit your paper. You feel happy ― you have finally finished a year’s worth of work. You will submit your paper tomorrow, and regardless of the outcome, you know that you can do it. If one journal does not take your paper, you will take advantage of the feedback and resubmit again. You will have a publication, and this is the most important achievement.

What is even more important is that you have your scheduled writing time that you are going to keep for your future publications, for reading and taking notes, for writing grants, and for reviewing papers. You are not going to lose stamina this time, and you will become a productive scientist. But for now, let’s celebrate the end of the paper.

• Hayes JR. In: The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, and Applications. Levy CM, Ransdell SE, editors. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1996. A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing; pp. 1–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Silvia PJ. How to Write a Lot. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitesides GM. Whitesides’ Group: Writing a Paper. Adv Mater. 2004; 16 (15):1375–1377. [ Google Scholar ]
• Soto D, Funes MJ, Guzmán-García A, Warbrick T, Rotshtein T, Humphreys GW. Pleasant music overcomes the loss of awareness in patients with visual neglect. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009; 106 (14):6011–6016. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hofmann AH. Scientific Writing and Communication. Papers, Proposals, and Presentations. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zeiger M. Essentials of Writing Biomedical Research Papers. 2nd edition. San Francisco, CA: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.; 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Martínez I. Native and non-native writers’ use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2005; 14 (3):174–190. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodman L. The Active Voice In Scientific Articles: Frequency And Discourse Functions. Journal Of Technical Writing And Communication. 1994; 24 (3):309–331. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tarone LE, Dwyer S, Gillette S, Icke V. On the use of the passive in two astrophysics journal papers with extensions to other languages and other fields. English for Specific Purposes. 1998; 17 :113–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Penrose AM, Katz SB. Writing in the sciences: Exploring conventions of scientific discourse. New York: St. Martin’s Press; 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
• Swales JM, Feak CB. Academic Writing for Graduate Students. 2nd edition. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hess DR. How to Write an Effective Discussion. Respiratory Care. 2004; 29 (10):1238–1241. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Belcher WL. Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks: a guide to academic publishing success. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Single PB. Demystifying Dissertation Writing: A Streamlined Process of Choice of Topic to Final Text. Virginia: Stylus Publishing LLC; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Faigley L, Witte SP. Analyzing revision. Composition and Communication. 1981; 32 :400–414. [ Google Scholar ]
• Flower LS, Hayes JR, Carey L, Schriver KS, Stratman J. Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication. 1986; 37 (1):16–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Young BR. In: A Tutor’s Guide: Helping Writers One to One. Rafoth B, editor. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers; 2005. Can You Proofread This? pp. 140–158. [ Google Scholar ]

• Mobile Site
• Staff Directory
• Advertise with Ars

Filter by topic

• Biz & IT
• Gaming & Culture

Front page layout

Delving deep —

The telltale words that could identify generative ai text, new paper counts "excess words" that started appearing more often in the post-llm era..

Kyle Orland - Jul 1, 2024 11:30 am UTC

Further Reading

To measure these vocabulary changes, the researchers analyzed 14 million paper abstracts published on PubMed between 2010 and 2024, tracking the relative frequency of each word as it appeared across each year. They then compared the expected frequency of those words (based on the pre-2023 trendline) to the actual frequency of those words in abstracts from 2023 and 2024, when LLMs were in widespread use.

The results found a number of words that were extremely uncommon in these scientific abstracts before 2023 that suddenly surged in popularity after LLMs were introduced. The word "delves," for instance, shows up in 25 times as many 2024 papers as the pre-LLM trend would expect; words like "showcasing" and "underscores" increased in usage by nine times as well. Other previously common words became notably more common in post-LLM abstracts: the frequency of "potential" increased 4.1 percentage points; "findings" by 2.7 percentage points; and "crucial" by 2.6 percentage points, for instance.

These kinds of changes in word use could happen independently of LLM usage, of course—the natural evolution of language means words sometimes go in and out of style. However, the researchers found that, in the pre-LLM era, such massive and sudden year-over-year increases were only seen for words related to major world health events: "ebola" in 2015; "zika" in 2017; and words like "coronavirus," "lockdown" and "pandemic" in the 2020 to 2022 period.

In the post-LLM period, though, the researchers found hundreds of words with sudden, pronounced increases in scientific usage that had no common link to world events. In fact, while the excess words during the COVID pandemic were overwhelmingly nouns, the researchers found that the words with a post-LLM frequency bump were overwhelmingly "style words" like verbs, adjectives, and adverbs (a small sampling: "across, additionally, comprehensive, crucial, enhancing, exhibited, insights, notably, particularly, within").

This isn't a completely new finding—the increased prevalence of "delve" in scientific papers has been widely noted in the recent past , for instance. But previous studies generally relied on comparisons with "ground truth" human writing samples or lists of pre-defined LLM markers obtained from outside the study. Here, the pre-2023 set of abstracts acts as its own effective control group to show how vocabulary choice has changed overall in the post-LLM era.

An intricate interplay

By highlighting hundreds of so-called "marker words" that became significantly more common in the post-LLM era, the telltale signs of LLM use can sometimes be easy to pick out. Take this example abstract line called out by the researchers, with the marker words highlighted: "A comprehensive grasp of the intricate interplay between [...] and [...] is pivotal for effective therapeutic strategies."

After doing some statistical measures of marker word appearance across individual papers, the researchers estimate that at least 10 percent of the post-2022 papers in the PubMed corpus were written with at least some LLM assistance. The number could be even higher, the researchers say, because their set could be missing LLM-assisted abstracts that don't include any of the marker words they identified.

Those measured percentages can vary a lot across different subsets of papers, too. The researchers found that papers authored in countries like China, South Korea, and Taiwan showed LLM marker words 15 percent of the time, suggesting "LLMs might... help non-natives with editing English texts, which could justify their extensive use." On the other hand, the researchers offer that native English speakers "may [just] be better at noticing and actively removing unnatural style words from LLM outputs," thus hiding their LLM usage from this kind of analysis.

Detecting LLM use is important, the researchers note, because "LLMs are infamous for making up references, providing inaccurate summaries, and making false claims that sound authoritative and convincing." But as knowledge of LLMs' telltale marker words starts to spread, human editors may get better at taking those words out of generated text before it's shared with the world.

Who knows, maybe future large language models will do this kind of frequency analysis themselves, lowering the weight of marker words to better mask their outputs as human-like. Before long, we may need to call in some Blade Runners to pick out the generative AI text hiding in our midst.

reader comments

Promoted comments.

Channel Ars Technica

Even short trips to space can change an astronaut’s biology − a new set of studies offers the most comprehensive look at spaceflight health since NASA’s Twins Study

Professor of Radiation Cancer Biology and Oncology, Colorado State University

Disclosure statement

Susan Bailey receives funding from NASA.

Colorado State University provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.

View all partners

Only about 600 people have ever traveled to space. The vast majority of astronauts over the past six decades have been middle-aged men on short-duration missions of fewer than 20 days.

Today, with private, commercial and multinational spaceflight providers and flyers entering the market, we are witnessing a new era of human spaceflight. Missions have ranged from minutes, hours and days to months.

As humanity looks ahead to returning to the Moon over the coming decade, space exploration missions will be much longer, with many more space travelers and even space tourists. This also means that a wider diversity of people will experience the extreme environment of space – more women and people of different ethnicities, ages and health status.

Since people respond differently to the unique stressors and exposures of space, researchers in space health, like me, seek to better understand the human health effects of spaceflight. With such information, we can figure out how to help astronauts stay healthy both while they’re in space and once they return to Earth.

As part of the historic NASA Twins Study , in 2019, my colleagues and I published groundbreaking research on how one year on board the International Space Station affects the human body.

I am a radiation cancer biologist in Colorado State University’s Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences. I’ve spent the past few years continuing to build on that earlier research in a series of papers recently published across the portfolio of Nature journals .

These papers are part of the Space Omics and Medical Atlas package of manuscripts , data, protocols and repositories that represent the largest collection ever assembled for aerospace medicine and space biology. Over 100 institutions from 25 countries contributed to the coordinated release of a wide range of spaceflight data.

The NASA Twins Study

NASA’s Twins Study seized on a unique research opportunity.

NASA selected astronaut Scott Kelly for the agency’s first one-year mission, during which he spent a year on board the International Space Station from 2015 into 2016. Over the same time period, his identical twin brother, Mark Kelly, a former astronaut and current U.S. senator representing Arizona, remained on Earth.

My team and I examined blood samples collected from the twin in space and his genetically matched twin back on Earth before, during and after spaceflight. We found that Scott’s telomeres – the protective caps at the ends of chromosomes, much like the plastic tip that keeps a shoelace from fraying – lengthened, quite unexpectedly, during his year in space.

When Scott returned to Earth, however, his telomeres quickly shortened. Over the following months, his telomeres recovered but were still shorter after his journey than they had been before he went to space.

As you get older, your telomeres shorten because of a variety of factors, including stress. The length of your telomeres can serve as a biological indicator of your risk for developing age-related conditions such as dementia, cardiovascular disease and cancer.

In a separate study , my team studied a cohort of 10 astronauts on six-month missions on board the International Space Station. We also had a control group of age- and sex-matched participants who stayed on the ground.

We measured telomere length before, during and after spaceflight and again found that telomeres were longer during spaceflight and then shortened upon return to Earth. Overall, the astronauts had many more short telomeres after spaceflight than they had before.

One of the other Twins Study investigators, Christopher Mason , and I conducted another telomere study – this time with twin high-altitude mountain climbers – a somewhat similar extreme environment on Earth.

We found that while climbing Mount Everest, the climbers’ telomeres were longer, and after they descended, their telomeres shortened. Their twins who remained at low altitude didn’t experience the same changes in telomere length. These results indicate that it’s not the space station’s microgravity that led to the telomere length changes we observed in the astronauts – other culprits, such as increased radiation exposure, are more likely.

Civilians in space

In our latest study , we studied telomeres from the crew on board SpaceX’s 2021 Inspiration4 mission. This mission had the first all-civilian crew, whose ages spanned four decades. All of the crew members’ telomeres lengthened during the mission, and three of the four astronauts also exhibited telomere shortening once they were back on Earth.

What’s particularly interesting about these findings is that the Inspiration4 mission lasted only three days. So, not only do scientists now have consistent and reproducible data on telomeres’ response to spaceflight, but we also know it happens quickly. These results suggest that even short trips, like a weekend getaway to space, will be associated with changes in telomere length.

Scientists still don’t totally understand the health impacts of such changes in telomere length. We’ll need more research to figure out how both long and short telomeres might affect an astronaut’s long-term health.

Telomeric RNA

In another paper , we showed that the Inspiration4 crew – as well as Scott Kelly and the high-altitude mountain climbers – exhibited increased levels of telomeric RNA, termed TERRA.

Telomeres consist of lots of repetitive DNA sequences. These are transcribed into TERRA, which contributes to telomere structure and helps them do their job.

Together with laboratory studies, these findings tell us that telomeres are being damaged during spaceflight. While there is still a lot we don’t know, we do know that telomeres are especially sensitive to oxidative stress . So, the chronic oxidative damage that astronauts experience when exposed to space radiation around the clock likely contributes to the telomeric responses we observe.

We also wrote a review article with a more futuristic perspective of how better understanding telomeres and aging might begin to inform the ability of humans to not only survive long-duration space travel but also to thrive and even colonize other planets. Doing so would require humans to reproduce in space and future generations to grow up in space. We don’t know if that’s even possible – yet.

Plant telomeres in space

My colleagues and I contributed other work to the Space Omics and Medical Atlas package, as well, including a paper published in Nature Communications . The study team, led by Texas A&M biologist Dorothy Shippen and Ohio University biologist Sarah Wyatt , found that, unlike people, plants flown in space did not have longer telomeres during their time on board the International Space Station.

The plants did, however, ramp up their production of telomerase , the enzyme that helps maintain telomere length.

As anyone who’s seen “ The Martian ” knows, plants will play an essential role in long-term human survival in space. This finding suggests that plants are perhaps more naturally suited to withstand the stressors of space than humans.

• Space health
• International Space Station (ISS)
• Private spaceflight

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 186,800 academics and researchers from 4,994 institutions.

Register now