sections of a scientific research article

How to Read a Scholarly Article

• Introduction

Article Text

• References/Works Cited
• 2. Sections of a Scholarly Article: Humanities Article

Sections of a Scholarly Journal Article About Scientific Research

Let's look at the different parts of a scholarly article that presents scientific research:

• Brief description of the article
• You can read this to decide whether you want to read the entire article.

Introduction:

• Description of the problem, or the research question, and why this study is being done
• Sometimes includes a short literature review (a discussion of other sources, such as books and articles, that informed the author(s) of this article)

• The main part of an article is its body text.
• This is where the author analyzes the argument, research question, or problem. This section also includes analysis and criticism.
• The author may use headings to divide this part of the article into sections. 

Scientific research articles may include these sections:

• Literature review (Discussion of other sources, such as books and articles, that informed the author(s) of this article)
• Methods (Description of the way the research study was set up and how data was collected)
• Results (Presentation of the research study results)
• Discussion (Discussion of whether the results of the study answer the research question)

You may see some of these same sections in articles written by scholars who work in the humanities (fields of study that include literature, philosophy, history, languages, and the arts).

Conclusion:

• Wraps up the article.
• This section isn't always labeled. 
• Description of how this article or research study contributes to or builds on the previous research of other scholars.
• Also includes ideas for future research others might do on this topic.

References/Works Cited:

List of resources (books, articles, etc.) cited in this article.

This example uses pages from this article: Sampson, L., Ettman, C., Abdalla, S., Colyer, E., Dukes, K., Lane, K., & Galea, S. (2021). Financial hardship and health risk behavior during COVID-19 in a large US national sample of women. SSM - Population Health, 13, 100734–100734 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100734

• << Previous: Home
• Next: 2. Sections of a Scholarly Article: Humanities Article >>
• Last Updated: Jul 17, 2024 1:02 PM
• URL: https://libguides.sjf.edu/scholarly-article

• Duke NetID Login
• 919.660.1100
• Duke Health Badge: 24-hour access
• Accounts & Access
• Databases, Journals & Books
• Request & Reserve
• Training & Consulting
• Request Articles & Books
• Renew Online
• Reserve Spaces
• Reserve a Locker
• Study & Meeting Rooms
• Course Reserves
• Pay Fines/Fees
• Recommend a Purchase
• Access From Off Campus
• Building Access
• Computers & Equipment
• Wifi Access
• My Accounts
• Mobile Apps
• Known Access Issues
• Report an Access Issue
• All Databases
• Article Databases
• Basic Sciences
• Clinical Sciences
• Dissertations & Theses
• Drugs, Chemicals & Toxicology
• Grants & Funding
• Interprofessional Education
• Non-Medical Databases
• Search for E-Journals
• Search for Print & E-Journals
• Search for E-Books
• Search for Print & E-Books
• E-Book Collections
• Biostatistics
• Global Health
• MBS Program
• Medical Students
• MMCi Program
• Occupational Therapy
• Path Asst Program
• Physical Therapy
• Population Health
• Researchers
• Community Partners

Conducting Research

• Archival & Historical Research
• Black History at Duke Health
• Data Analytics & Viz Software
• Data: Find and Share
• Evidence-Based Practice
• NIH Public Access Policy Compliance
• Publication Metrics
• Qualitative Research
• Searching Animal Alternatives
• Systematic Reviews
• Test Instruments

Using Databases

• JCR Impact Factors
• Web of Science

Finding & Accessing

• COVID-19: Core Clinical Resources
• Health Literacy
• Health Statistics & Data
• Library Orientation

Writing & Citing

• Creating Links
• Getting Published
• Reference Mgmt
• Scientific Writing

Meet a Librarian

• Request a Consultation
• Find Your Liaisons
• Register for a Class
• Request a Class
• Self-Paced Learning

Search Services

• Literature Search
• Systematic Review
• Animal Alternatives (IACUC)
• Research Impact

Citation Mgmt

• Other Software

Scholarly Communications

• About Scholarly Communications
• Publish Your Work
• Measure Your Research Impact
• Engage in Open Science
• Libraries and Publishers
• Directions & Maps
• Floor Plans

Library Updates

• Annual Snapshot
• Conference Presentations
• Contact Information
• Gifts & Donations

Scientific Writing: Sections of a Paper

• Sections of a Paper
• Common Grammar Mistakes Explained
• Citing Sources

Introduction

• Materials & Methods

Typically scientific journal articles have the following sections:

Materials & Methods

References used:

Kotsis, S.V. and Chung, K.C. (2010) A Guide for Writing in the Scientific Forum. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 126(5):1763-71. PubMed ID:  21042135

Van Way, C.W. (2007) Writing a Scientific Paper. Nutrition in Clinical Practice. 22: 663-40. PubMed ID:  1804295

What to include:

• Background/Objectives: include the hypothesis
• Methods: Briefly explain the type of study, sample/population size and description, the design, and any particular techniques for data collection and analysis
• Results: Essential data, including statistically significant data (use # & %)
• Conclusions: Summarize interpretations of results and explain if hypothesis was supported or rejected
• Be concise!
• Emphasize the methods and results
• Do not copy the introduction
• Only include data that is included in the paper
• Write the abstract last
• Avoid jargon and ambiguity
• Should stand-alone

Additional resources: Fisher, W. E. (2005) Abstract Writing. Journal of Surgical Research. 128(2):162-4. PubMed ID:  16165161 Peh, W.C. and Ng, K.H. (2008) Abstract and keywords. Singapore Medical Journal. 49(9): 664-6. PubMed ID:  18830537

• How does your study fit into what has been done
• Explain evidence using limited # of references
• Why is it important
• How does it relate to previous research
• State hypothesis at the end
• Use present tense
• Be succinct
• Clearly state objectives
• Explain important work done

Additional resources: Annesley, T. M. (2010) "It was a cold and rainy night": set the scene with a good introduction. Clinical Chemistry. 56(5):708-13. PubMed ID:  20207764 Peh, W.C. and Ng, K.H. (2008) Writing the introduction. Singapore Medical Journal. 49(10):756-8. PubMed ID:  18946606  

• What was done
• Include characteristics
• Describe recruitment, participation, withdrawal, etc.
• Type of study (RCT, cohort, case-controlled, etc.)
• Equipment used
• Measurements made
• Usually the final paragraph
• Include enough details so others can duplicate study
• Use past tense
• Be direct and precise
• Include any preliminary results
• Ask for help from a statistician to write description of statistical analysis
• Be systematic

Additional resources: Lallet, R. H. (2004) How to write the methods section of a research paper. Respiratory Care. 49(10): 1229-32. PubMed ID:  15447808 Ng, K.H. and Peh, W.C. (2008) Writing the materials and methods. Singapore Medical Journal. 49(11): 856-9. PubMed ID:  19037549

• Describe study sample demographics
• Include statistical significance and the statistical test used
• Use tables and figures when appropriate
• Present in a logical sequence
• Facts only - no citations or interpretations
• Should stand alone (not need written descriptions to be understood)
• Include title, legend, and axes labels
• Include raw numbers with percentages
• General phrases (significance, show trend, etc. should be used with caution)
• Data is plural ("Our data are" is correct, "Our data is" is in-correct)

Additional resources: Ng, K.H and Peh, W.C. (2008) Writing the results. Singapore Medical Journal. 49(12):967-9. PubMed ID:  19122944 Streiner, D.L. (2007) A shortcut to rejection: how not to write the results section of a paper. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 52(6):385-9. PubMed ID:  17696025

• Did you reject your null hypothesis?
• Include a focused review of literature in relation to results
• Explain meaning of statistical findings
• Explain importance/relevance 
• Include all possible explanations
• Discuss possible limitations of study
• Suggest future work that could be done
• Use past tense to describe your study and present tense to describe established knowledge from literature
• Don't criticize other studies, contrast it with your work
• Don't make conclusions not supported by your results
• Stay focused and concise
• Include key, relevant references
• It is considered good manners to include an acknowledgements section

Additional resources: Annesley, T. M. (2010) The discussion section: your closing argument. Clinical Chemistry. 56(11):1671-4. PubMed ID:  20833779 Ng, K.H. and Peh, W.C. (2009) Writing the discussion. Singapore Medical Journal. 50(5):458-61. PubMed ID:  19495512

Tables & Figures: Durbin, C. G. (2004) Effective use of tables and figures in abstracts, presentations, and papers. Respiratory Care. 49(10): 1233-7. PubMed ID:  15447809 Ng, K. H. and Peh, W.C.G. (2009) Preparing effective tables. Singapore Medical Journal. (50)2: 117-9. PubMed ID:  19296024

Statistics: Ng, K. H. and Peh, W.C.G. (2009) Presenting the statistical results. Singapore Medical Journal. (50)1: 11-4. PubMed ID:  19224078

References: Peh, W.C.G. and Ng, K. H. (2009) Preparing the references. Singapore Medical Journal. (50)7: 11-4. PubMed ID:  19644619

Additional Resources

• More from Elsevier Elsevier's Research Academy is an online tutorial to help with writing books, journals, and grants. It also includes information on citing sources, peer reviewing, and ethics in publishing
• Research4Life Training Portal Research4Life provides downloadable instruction materials, including modules on authorship skills as well as other research related skills.
• Coursera: Science Writing Coursera provides a wide variety of online courses for continuing education. You can search around for various courses on scientific writing or academic writing, and they're available to audit for free.

• << Previous: Lit Review
• Next: Grammar/Language >>
• Last Updated: Jul 16, 2024 5:30 PM
• URL: https://guides.mclibrary.duke.edu/scientificwriting
• Duke Health
• Duke University
• Duke Libraries
• Medical Center Archives
• Duke Directory
• Seeley G. Mudd Building
• 10 Searle Drive
• [email protected]

Scientific and Scholarly Writing

• PubMed and other NLM Literature Databases
• Tracking and Citing References

Parts of a Scientific & Scholarly Paper

Introduction.

• Writing Effectively
• Where to Publish?
• Avoid Plagiarism

Different sections are needed in different types of scientific papers (lab reports, literature reviews, systematic reviews, methods papers, research papers, etc.). Projects that overlap with the social sciences or humanities may have different requirements. Generally, however, you'll need to include:

INTRODUCTION (Background)

METHODS SECTION (Materials and Methods)

What is a title?

Titles have two functions: to identify the main topic or the message of the paper and to attract readers.

The title will be read by many people. Only a few will read the entire paper, therefore all words in the title should be chosen with care. Too short a title is not helpful to the potential reader. Too long a title can sometimes be even less meaningful. Remember a title is not an abstract. Neither is a title a sentence.

What makes a good title?

A good title is accurate, complete, and specific. Imagine searching for your paper in PubMed. What words would you use?

• Use the fewest possible words that describe the contents of the paper.
• Avoid waste words like "Studies on", or "Investigations on".
• Use specific terms rather than general.
• Use the same key terms in the title as the paper.
• Watch your word order and syntax.
• Avoid abbreviations, jargon, and special characters.

The abstract is a miniature version of your paper. It should present the main story and a few essential details of the paper for readers who only look at the abstract and should serve as a clear preview for readers who read your whole paper. They are usually short (250 words or less).

The goal is to communicate:

•  What was done?
•  Why was it done?
•  How was it done?
•  What was found?

A good abstract is specific and selective. Try summarizing each of the sections of your paper in a sentence two. Do the abstract last, so you know exactly what you want to write.

• Use 1 or more well developed paragraphs.
• Use introduction/body/conclusion structure.
• Present purpose, results, conclusions and recommendations in that order.
• Make it understandable to a wide audience.

What is an introduction?

The introduction tells the reader why you are writing your paper (ie, identifies a gap in the literature) and supplies sufficient background information that the reader can understand and evaluate your project without referring to previous publications on the topic.

The nature and scope of the problem investigated.

The pertinent literature already written on the subject.

The method of the investigation.

The hypothesized results of the project.

What makes a good introduction?

A good introduction is not the same as an abstract. Where the abstract summarizes your paper, the introduction justifies your project and lets readers know what to expect.

• Keep it brief. You conducted an extensive literature review, so that you can give readers just the relevant information. • Cite your sources using in-text citations. • Use the present tense. Keep using the present tense for the whole paper. • Use the same information that you use in the rest of your paper.

What is a methods section?

Generally a methods section tells the reader how you conducted your project. 

It is also called "Materials and Methods".

The goal is to make your project reproducible.

What makes a good methods section?

A good methods section gives enough detail that another scientist could reproduce or replicate your results.

• Use very specific language, similar to a recipe in a cookbook. • If something is not standard (equipment, method, chemical compound, statistical analysis), then describe it. • Use the past tense. • Subheadings should follow guidelines of a style (APA, Vancouver, etc.) or journal (journals will specify these in their "for authors" section). For medical education writing, refer to the AMA Manual of Style .

  What is a results section?

The results objectively present the data or information that you gathered through your project. The narrative that you write here will point readers to your figures and tables that present your relevant data.

Keep in mind that you may be able to include more of your data in an online journal supplement or research data repository.

What makes a good results section?

A good results section is not the same as the discussion. Present the facts in the results, saving the interpretation for the discussion section. The results section should be written in past tense.

• Make figures and tables clearly labelled and easy to read. If you include a figure or table, explain it in the results section. • Present representative data rather than endlessly repetitive data . • Discuss variables only if they had an effect (positive or negative) • Use meaningful statistics . • Describe statistical analyses you ran on the data.

What is a discussion section?

The discussion section is the answer to the question(s) you posed in the introduction section. It is where you interpret your results. You have a lot of flexibility in this section. In addition to your main findings or conclusions, consider:

• Limitations and strengths of your project. • Directions for future research.

What makes a good  discussion section?

A good discussion section should read very differently than the results section. The discussion is where you interpret the project as a whole.

• Present principles, relationships and generalizations shown by the results. • Discuss the significance or importance of the results. • Discuss the theoretical implications of your work as well as practical applications • Show how your results agree or disagree with previously published works.

• << Previous: Tracking and Citing References
• Next: Writing Effectively >>
• Last Updated: Aug 5, 2024 2:28 PM
• URL: https://libraryguides.umassmed.edu/scientific-writing

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
• Prev Chronic Dis

Successful Scientific Writing and Publishing: A Step-by-Step Approach

John k. iskander.

1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia

Sara Beth Wolicki

2 Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health, Washington, District of Columbia

Rebecca T. Leeb

Paul z. siegel.

Scientific writing and publication are essential to advancing knowledge and practice in public health, but prospective authors face substantial challenges. Authors can overcome barriers, such as lack of understanding about scientific writing and the publishing process, with training and resources. The objective of this article is to provide guidance and practical recommendations to help both inexperienced and experienced authors working in public health settings to more efficiently publish the results of their work in the peer-reviewed literature. We include an overview of basic scientific writing principles, a detailed description of the sections of an original research article, and practical recommendations for selecting a journal and responding to peer review comments. The overall approach and strategies presented are intended to contribute to individual career development while also increasing the external validity of published literature and promoting quality public health science.

Introduction

Publishing in the peer-reviewed literature is essential to advancing science and its translation to practice in public health ( 1 , 2 ). The public health workforce is diverse and practices in a variety of settings ( 3 ). For some public health professionals, writing and publishing the results of their work is a requirement. Others, such as program managers, policy makers, or health educators, may see publishing as being outside the scope of their responsibilities ( 4 ).

Disseminating new knowledge via writing and publishing is vital both to authors and to the field of public health ( 5 ). On an individual level, publishing is associated with professional development and career advancement ( 6 ). Publications share new research, results, and methods in a trusted format and advance scientific knowledge and practice ( 1 , 7 ). As more public health professionals are empowered to publish, the science and practice of public health will advance ( 1 ).

Unfortunately, prospective authors face barriers to publishing their work, including navigating the process of scientific writing and publishing, which can be time-consuming and cumbersome. Often, public health professionals lack both training opportunities and understanding of the process ( 8 ). To address these barriers and encourage public health professionals to publish their findings, the senior author (P.Z.S.) and others developed Successful Scientific Writing (SSW), a course about scientific writing and publishing. Over the past 30 years, this course has been taught to thousands of public health professionals, as well as hundreds of students at multiple graduate schools of public health. An unpublished longitudinal survey of course participants indicated that two-thirds agreed that SSW had helped them to publish a scientific manuscript or have a conference abstract accepted. The course content has been translated into this manuscript. The objective of this article is to provide prospective authors with the tools needed to write original research articles of high quality that have a good chance of being published.

Basic Recommendations for Scientific Writing

Prospective authors need to know and tailor their writing to the audience. When writing for scientific journals, 4 fundamental recommendations are: clearly stating the usefulness of the study, formulating a key message, limiting unnecessary words, and using strategic sentence structure.

To demonstrate usefulness, focus on how the study addresses a meaningful gap in current knowledge or understanding. What critical piece of information does the study provide that will help solve an important public health problem? For example, if a particular group of people is at higher risk for a specific condition, but the magnitude of that risk is unknown, a study to quantify the risk could be important for measuring the population’s burden of disease.

Scientific articles should have a clear and concise take-home message. Typically, this is expressed in 1 to 2 sentences that summarize the main point of the paper. This message can be used to focus the presentation of background information, results, and discussion of findings. As an early step in the drafting of an article, we recommend writing out the take-home message and sharing it with co-authors for their review and comment. Authors who know their key point are better able to keep their writing within the scope of the article and present information more succinctly. Once an initial draft of the manuscript is complete, the take-home message can be used to review the content and remove needless words, sentences, or paragraphs.

Concise writing improves the clarity of an article. Including additional words or clauses can divert from the main message and confuse the reader. Additionally, journal articles are typically limited by word count. The most important words and phrases to eliminate are those that do not add meaning, or are duplicative. Often, cutting adjectives or parenthetical statements results in a more concise paper that is also easier to read.

Sentence structure strongly influences the readability and comprehension of journal articles. Twenty to 25 words is a reasonable range for maximum sentence length. Limit the number of clauses per sentence, and place the most important or relevant clause at the end of the sentence ( 9 ). Consider the sentences:

• By using these tips and tricks, an author may write and publish an additional 2 articles a year.
• An author may write and publish an additional 2 articles a year by using these tips and tricks.

The focus of the first sentence is on the impact of using the tips and tricks, that is, 2 more articles published per year. In contrast, the second sentence focuses on the tips and tricks themselves.

Authors should use the active voice whenever possible. Consider the following example:

• Active voice: Authors who use the active voice write more clearly.
• Passive voice: Clarity of writing is promoted by the use of the active voice.

The active voice specifies who is doing the action described in the sentence. Using the active voice improves clarity and understanding, and generally uses fewer words. Scientific writing includes both active and passive voice, but authors should be intentional with their use of either one.

Sections of an Original Research Article

Original research articles make up most of the peer-reviewed literature ( 10 ), follow a standardized format, and are the focus of this article. The 4 main sections are the introduction, methods, results, and discussion, sometimes referred to by the initialism, IMRAD. These 4 sections are referred to as the body of an article. Two additional components of all peer-reviewed articles are the title and the abstract. Each section’s purpose and key components, along with specific recommendations for writing each section, are listed below.

Title. The purpose of a title is twofold: to provide an accurate and informative summary and to attract the target audience. Both prospective readers and database search engines use the title to screen articles for relevance ( 2 ). All titles should clearly state the topic being studied. The topic includes the who, what, when, and where of the study. Along with the topic, select 1 or 2 of the following items to include within the title: methods, results, conclusions, or named data set or study. The items chosen should emphasize what is new and useful about the study. Some sources recommend limiting the title to less than 150 characters ( 2 ). Articles with shorter titles are more frequently cited than articles with longer titles ( 11 ). Several title options are possible for the same study ( Figure ).

Two examples of title options for a single study.

Abstract . The abstract serves 2 key functions. Journals may screen articles for potential publication by using the abstract alone ( 12 ), and readers may use the abstract to decide whether to read further. Therefore, it is critical to produce an accurate and clear abstract that highlights the major purpose of the study, basic procedures, main findings, and principal conclusions ( 12 ). Most abstracts have a word limit and can be either structured following IMRAD, or unstructured. The abstract needs to stand alone from the article and tell the most important parts of the scientific story up front.

Introduction . The purpose of the introduction is to explain how the study sought to create knowledge that is new and useful. The introduction section may often require only 3 paragraphs. First, describe the scope, nature, or magnitude of the problem being addressed. Next, clearly articulate why better understanding this problem is useful, including what is currently known and the limitations of relevant previous studies. Finally, explain what the present study adds to the knowledge base. Explicitly state whether data were collected in a unique way or obtained from a previously unstudied data set or population. Presenting both the usefulness and novelty of the approach taken will prepare the reader for the remaining sections of the article.

Methods . The methods section provides the information necessary to allow others, given the same data, to recreate the analysis. It describes exactly how data relevant to the study purpose were collected, organized, and analyzed. The methods section describes the process of conducting the study — from how the sample was selected to which statistical methods were used to analyze the data. Authors should clearly name, define, and describe each study variable. Some journals allow detailed methods to be included in an appendix or supplementary document. If the analysis involves a commonly used public health data set, such as the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System ( 13 ), general aspects of the data set can be provided to readers by using references. Because what was done is typically more important than who did it, use of the passive voice is often appropriate when describing methods. For example, “The study was a group randomized, controlled trial. A coin was tossed to select an intervention group and a control group.”

Results . The results section describes the main outcomes of the study or analysis but does not interpret the findings or place them in the context of previous research. It is important that the results be logically organized. Suggested organization strategies include presenting results pertaining to the entire population first, and then subgroup analyses, or presenting results according to increasing complexity of analysis, starting with demographic results before proceeding to univariate and multivariate analyses. Authors wishing to draw special attention to novel or unexpected results can present them first.

One strategy for writing the results section is to start by first drafting the figures and tables. Figures, which typically show trends or relationships, and tables, which show specific data points, should each support a main outcome of the study. Identify the figures and tables that best describe the findings and relate to the study’s purpose, and then develop 1 to 2 sentences summarizing each one. Data not relevant to the study purpose may be excluded, summarized briefly in the text, or included in supplemental data sets. When finalizing figures, ensure that axes are labeled and that readers can understand figures without having to refer to accompanying text.

Discussion . In the discussion section, authors interpret the results of their study within the context of both the related literature and the specific scientific gap the study was intended to fill. The discussion does not introduce results that were not presented in the results section. One way authors can focus their discussion is to limit this section to 4 paragraphs: start by reinforcing the study’s take-home message(s), contextualize key results within the relevant literature, state the study limitations, and lastly, make recommendations for further research or policy and practice changes. Authors can support assertions made in the discussion with either their own findings or by referencing related research. By interpreting their own study results and comparing them to others in the literature, authors can emphasize findings that are unique, useful, and relevant. Present study limitations clearly and without apology. Finally, state the implications of the study and provide recommendations or next steps, for example, further research into remaining gaps or changes to practice or policy. Statements or recommendations regarding policy may use the passive voice, especially in instances where the action to be taken is more important than who will implement the action.

Beginning the Writing Process

The process of writing a scientific article occurs before, during, and after conducting the study or analyses. Conducting a literature review is crucial to confirm the existence of the evidence gap that the planned analysis seeks to fill. Because literature searches are often part of applying for research funding or developing a study protocol, the citations used in the grant application or study proposal can also be used in subsequent manuscripts. Full-text databases such as PubMed Central ( 14 ), NIH RePORT ( 15 ), and CDC Stacks ( 16 ) can be useful when performing literature reviews. Authors should familiarize themselves with databases that are accessible through their institution and any assistance that may be available from reference librarians or interlibrary loan systems. Using citation management software is one way to establish and maintain a working reference list. Authors should clearly understand the distinction between primary and secondary references, and ensure that they are knowledgeable about the content of any primary or secondary reference that they cite.

Review of the literature may continue while organizing the material and writing begins. One way to organize material is to create an outline for the paper. Another way is to begin drafting small sections of the article such as the introduction. Starting a preliminary draft forces authors to establish the scope of their analysis and clearly articulate what is new and novel about the study. Furthermore, using information from the study protocol or proposal allows authors to draft the methods and part of the results sections while the study is in progress. Planning potential data comparisons or drafting “table shells” will help to ensure that the study team has collected all the necessary data. Drafting these preliminary sections early during the writing process and seeking feedback from co-authors and colleagues may help authors avoid potential pitfalls, including misunderstandings about study objectives.

The next step is to conduct the study or analyses and use the resulting data to fill in the draft table shells. The initial results will most likely require secondary analyses, that is, exploring the data in ways in addition to those originally planned. Authors should ensure that they regularly update their methods section to describe all changes to data analysis.

After completing table shells, authors should summarize the key finding of each table or figure in a sentence or two. Presenting preliminary results at meetings, conferences, and internal seminars is an established way to solicit feedback. Authors should pay close attention to questions asked by the audience, treating them as an informal opportunity for peer review. On the basis of the questions and feedback received, authors can incorporate revisions and improvements into subsequent drafts of the manuscript.

The relevant literature should be revisited periodically while writing to ensure knowledge of the most recent publications about the manuscript topic. Authors should focus on content and key message during the process of writing the first draft and should not spend too much time on issues of grammar or style. Drafts, or portions of drafts, should be shared frequently with trusted colleagues. Their recommendations should be reviewed and incorporated when they will improve the manuscript’s overall clarity.

For most authors, revising drafts of the manuscript will be the most time-consuming task involved in writing a paper. By regularly checking in with coauthors and colleagues, authors can adopt a systematic approach to rewriting. When the author has completed a draft of the manuscript, he or she should revisit the key take-home message to ensure that it still matches the final data and analysis. At this point, final comments and approval of the manuscript by coauthors can be sought.

Authors should then seek to identify journals most likely to be interested in considering the study for publication. Initial questions to consider when selecting a journal include:

• Which audience is most interested in the paper’s message?
• Would clinicians, public health practitioners, policy makers, scientists, or a broader audience find this useful in their field or practice?
• Do colleagues have prior experience submitting a manuscript to this journal?
• Is the journal indexed and peer-reviewed?
• Is the journal subscription or open-access and are there any processing fees?
• How competitive is the journal?

Authors should seek to balance the desire to be published in a top-tier journal (eg, Journal of the American Medical Association, BMJ, or Lancet) against the statistical likelihood of rejection. Submitting the paper initially to a journal more focused on the paper’s target audience may result in a greater chance of acceptance, as well as more timely dissemination of findings that can be translated into practice. Most of the 50 to 75 manuscripts published each week by authors from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are published in specialty and subspecialty journals, rather than in top-tier journals ( 17 ).

The target journal’s website will include author guidelines, which will contain specific information about format requirements (eg, font, line spacing, section order, reference style and limit, table and figure formatting), authorship criteria, article types, and word limits for articles and abstracts.

We recommend returning to the previously drafted abstract and ensuring that it complies with the journal’s format and word limit. Authors should also verify that any changes made to the methods or results sections during the article’s drafting are reflected in the final version of the abstract. The abstract should not be written hurriedly just before submitting the manuscript; it is often apparent to editors and reviewers when this has happened. A cover letter to accompany the submission should be drafted; new and useful findings and the key message should be included.

Before submitting the manuscript and cover letter, authors should perform a final check to ensure that their paper complies with all journal requirements. Journals may elect to reject certain submissions on the basis of review of the abstract, or may send them to peer reviewers (typically 2 or 3) for consultation. Occasionally, on the basis of peer reviews, the journal will request only minor changes before accepting the paper for publication. Much more frequently, authors will receive a request to revise and resubmit their manuscript, taking into account peer review comments. Authors should recognize that while revise-and-resubmit requests may state that the manuscript is not acceptable in its current form, this does not constitute a rejection of the article. Authors have several options in responding to peer review comments:

• Performing additional analyses and updating the article appropriately
• Declining to perform additional analyses, but providing an explanation (eg, because the requested analysis goes beyond the scope of the article)
• Providing updated references
• Acknowledging reviewer comments that are simply comments without making changes

In addition to submitting a revised manuscript, authors should include a cover letter in which they list peer reviewer comments, along with the revisions they have made to the manuscript and their reply to the comment. The tone of such letters should be thankful and polite, but authors should make clear areas of disagreement with peer reviewers, and explain why they disagree. During the peer review process, authors should continue to consult with colleagues, especially ones who have more experience with the specific journal or with the peer review process.

There is no secret to successful scientific writing and publishing. By adopting a systematic approach and by regularly seeking feedback from trusted colleagues throughout the study, writing, and article submission process, authors can increase their likelihood of not only publishing original research articles of high quality but also becoming more scientifically productive overall.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge PCD ’s former Associate Editor, Richard A. Goodman, MD, MPH, who, while serving as Editor in Chief of CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Series, initiated a curriculum on scientific writing for training CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service Officers and other CDC public health professionals, and with whom the senior author of this article (P.Z.S.) collaborated in expanding training methods and contents, some of which are contained in this article. The authors acknowledge Juan Carlos Zevallos, MD, for his thoughtful critique and careful editing of previous Successful Scientific Writing materials. We also thank Shira Eisenberg for editorial assistance with the manuscript. This publication was supported by the Cooperative Agreement no. 1U360E000002 from CDC and the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. The findings and conclusions of this article do not necessarily represent the official views of CDC or the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health. Names of journals and citation databases are provided for identification purposes only and do not constitute any endorsement by CDC.

The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions.

Suggested citation for this article: Iskander JK, Wolicki SB, Leeb RT, Siegel PZ. Successful Scientific Writing and Publishing: A Step-by-Step Approach. Prev Chronic Dis 2018;15:180085. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd15.180085 .

Journal Article Basics

• What, Why, & Where
• Peer Review

What is an abstract?

Publication, introduction, charts, graphs, etc., article text, methods or methodology.

• Identification
• Reading an Article
• Types of Articles

Knowing about the different sections of a scholarly article and the type of information presented in each section, will make it easier to understand what the article is about. Also, reading specific parts or sections of an article can help save you time as you decide whether an article is relevant.

• Anatomy of a Scholarly Article [NCSU Interactive Tutorial] Excellent interactive tool for learning about the sections of a scholarly article.

The title of a scholarly article is generally (but not always) an extremely brief summary of the article's contents. It will usually contain technical terms related to the research presented.

Authors and their credentials will be provided in a scholarly article. Credentials may appear with the authors' names, as in this example, or they may appear as a footnote or an endnote to the article. The authors' credentials are provided to establish the authority of the authors, and also to provide a point of contact for the research presented in the article. For this reason, authors' e-mail addresses are usually provided in recent articles.

On the first page of an article you will usually find the journal title, volume/issue numbers, if applicable, and page numbers of the article. This information is necessary for you to write a citation of the article for your paper.

The information is not always neatly outlined at the bottom of the first page; it may be spread across the header and footer of the first page, or across the headers or footers of opposite pages, and for some online versions of articles, it may not be present at all.

The abstract is a brief summary of the contents of the article, usually under 250 words. It will contain a description of the problem and problem setting; an outline of the study, experiment, or argument; and a summary of the conclusions or findings. It is provided so that readers examining the article can decide quickly whether the article meets their needs.

The introduction to a scholarly article describes the topic or problem the authors researched. The authors will present the thesis of their argument or the goal of their research. The introduction may also discuss the relevance or importance of the research question.

An overview of related research and findings, called a literature review, may appear in the introduction, though the literature review may be in its own section.

Scholarly articles frequently contain charts, graphs, equations, and statistical data related to the research. Pictures are rare unless they relate directly to the research presented in the article.

The body of an article is usually presented in sections, including an  introduction , a  literature review , one or more sections describing and analyzing the argument, experiment or study.

Scientific research articles typically include separate sections addressing the methods  and results  of the experiment, and a discussion  of the research findings.

Articles typically close with a conclusion  summarizing the findings.

The parts of the article may or may not be labeled, and two or more sections may be combined in a single part of the text. The text itself is typically highly technical, and assumes a familiarity with the topic. Jargon, abbreviations, and technical terms are used without definition.

The methods section of a scholarly article generally outlines the experimental design, the materials, and the methods (procedures) of the experiment. 

The results section of a scholarly article is generally devoted to discussing the type of analysis conducted regarding the data as well as the results. 

A scholarly article will end with a conclusion, where the authors summarize the results of their research. The authors may also discuss how their findings relate to other scholarship, or encourage other researchers to extend or follow up on their work.

The discussion of a scholarly article generally includes a description of how the study contributes to the existing body of research, an analysis of the research questions and hypotheses, and a discussion of the research in connection to the real world. 

Most scholarly articles contain many references to publications by other authors. You will find these references scattered throughout the text of the article, as footnotes at the bottom of the page, or endnotes at the end of the article.

Most papers provide a list of references at the end of the paper. Each reference listed there corresponds to one of the citations provided in the body of the paper. You can use this list of references to find additional scholarly articles and books on your topic.

• << Previous: Peer Review
• Next: Identification >>
• Last Updated: Aug 23, 2024 11:04 AM
• URL: https://libguides.pittcc.edu/journal-articles

Scientific Writing: Structuring a scientific article

• Resume/Cover letter
• Structuring a scientific article
• AMA Citation Style This link opens in a new window
• APA Citation Style This link opens in a new window
• Scholarly Publishing This link opens in a new window

How to Structure a Scientific Article

Many scientific articles include the following elements:

I. Abstract: The abstract should briefly summarize the contents of your article. Be sure to include a quick overview of the focus, results and conclusion of your study.

II. Introduction:  The introduction should include any relevant background information and articulate the idea that is being investigated. Why is this study unique? If others have performed research on the topic, include a literature review. 

III. Methods and Materials:  The methods and materials section should provide information on how the study was conducted and what materials were included. Other researchers should be able to reproduce your study based on the information found in this section. 

IV. Results:  The results sections includes the data produced by your study. It should reflect an unbiased account of the study's findings. 

V.  Discussion and Conclusion:  The discussion section provides information on what researches felt was significant and analyzes the data. You may also want to provide final thoughts and ideas for further research in the conclusion section. 

For more information, see How to Read a Scientific Paper.  

Scientific Article Infographic

• Structure of a Scientific Article
• << Previous: Resume/Cover letter
• Next: AMA Citation Style >>

• Last Updated: Jul 16, 2024 11:58 AM
• URL: https://guides.himmelfarb.gwu.edu/scientific-writing

• Himmelfarb Intranet
• Privacy Notice
• Terms of Use
• GW is committed to digital accessibility. If you experience a barrier that affects your ability to access content on this page, let us know via the Accessibility Feedback Form .
• Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library
• 2300 Eye St., NW, Washington, DC 20037
• Phone: (202) 994-2962
• [email protected]
• https://himmelfarb.gwu.edu

The Sections of a Research Article

If you’ve ever read or written almost any type of academic document, you might have noticed that they start with introductions and end with conclusions. However, research articles – as a genre – have other consistent sections as well. The complete list of sections for research articles include the following:

• Introduction
• Discussion/Conclusion

A common acronym for teaching the sections of a research article is IMRD/C. In this book, we will focus heavily on helping you understand each of those IMRD/C sections’ various pieces, including their communicative goals and strategies you can use to achieve those goals. We will also use a visual of an hourglass to demonstrate this IMRD/C organizational structure.

We hope that this graphic along with the explanations and examples in Chapters 3-6 will allow you to deepen your understanding of research writing and become a more successful author.

Preparing to Publish Copyright © 2023 by Sarah Huffman; Elena Cotos; and Kimberly Becker is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• Research Guides

Reading for Research: Social Sciences

Structure of a research article.

• Structural Read

Guide Acknowledgements

How to Read a Scholarly Article from the Howard Tilton Memorial Library at Tulane University

Strategic Reading for Research   from the Howard Tilton Memorial Library at Tulane University

Bridging the Gap between Faculty Expectation and the Student Experience: Teaching Students toAnnotate and Synthesize Sources

Librarian for Sociology, Environmental Sociology, MHS and Public Policy Studies

Academic writing has features that vary only slightly across the different disciplines. Knowing these elements and the purpose of each serves help you to read and understand academic texts efficiently and effectively, and then apply what you read to your paper or project.

Social Science (and Science) original research articles generally follow IMRD: Introduction- Methods-Results-Discussion

Introduction

• Introduces topic of article
• Presents the "Research Gap"/Statement of Problem article will address
• How research presented in the article will solve the problem presented in research gap.
• Literature Review. presenting and evaluating previous scholarship on a topic.  Sometimes, this is separate section of the article. 

​Method & Results

• How research was done, including analysis and measurements.  
• Sometimes labeled as "Research Design"
• What answers were found
• Interpretation of Results (What Does It Mean? Why is it important?)
• Implications for the Field, how the study contributes to the existing field of knowledge
• Suggestions for further research
• Sometimes called Conclusion

You might also see IBC: Introduction - Body - Conclusion

• Identify the subject
• State the thesis 
• Describe why thesis is important to the field (this may be in the form of a literature review or general prose)

Body  

• Presents Evidence/Counter Evidence
• Integrate other writings (i.e. evidence) to support argument 
• Discuss why others may disagree (counter-evidence) and why argument is still valid
• Summary of argument
• Evaluation of argument by pointing out its implications and/or limitations 
• Anticipate and address possible counter-claims
• Suggest future directions of research
• Next: Structural Read >>
• Last Updated: Jan 19, 2024 10:44 AM
• URL: https://researchguides.library.vanderbilt.edu/readingforresearch