Search

Academic papers in the social sciences were once more essayistic in their form. The carefree launching of concepts and ideas of academic value were the order of the day, all without the security of the present standardized paper format inspired by the natural sciences. This text draws on the most cited paper by the acclaimed scholar Carol Weiss, as an outset to discussing academic writing; why we write as we do and what we may lose by doing so. This means exploring the history of academic writing as well as discussing the complex, yet exciting, relationship between writing, identity, language, and the very process of conducting research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) format is common in scientific writing, it may not currently be as ubiquitous as often thought. We undertook a systematic, corpus-based study of primary section headings in research articles across a range of STEM disciplines to investigate adherence to the IMRAD structure in relation to type of study (computational, empirical, or theoretical) and field. We identified four categories of structure: IMRAD, IMRAD+ (IMRAD with additional sections and/or different order), Nested IMRAD (multi-part studies), and Non-IMRAD. Papers in biology mainly used an IMRAD format, while less than half in engineering or social sciences did so. While empirical papers tended to use IMRAD formats, most computational papers did not. Thus, our findings show that IMRAD is a common but not universal structure for contemporary scientific writing. Awareness of these differences should encourage teachers of scientific and technical writing and scholars of writing studies to pay closer attention to the actual structural forms used in different STEM disciplines and with different methodological types of research studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore which structures of academic articles referees would pay more attention to, what specific content referees focus on, and whether the distribution of PRC is related to the citations. Design/methodology/approach: Firstly, utilizing the feature words of section title and hierarchical attention network model (HAN) to identify the academic article structures. Secondly, analyzing the distribution of PRC in different structures according to the position information extracted by rules in PRC. Thirdly, analyzing the distribution of feature words of PRC extracted by the Chi-square test and TF-IDF in different structures. Finally, four correlation analysis methods are used to analyze whether the distribution of PRC in different structures is correlated to the citations. Findings: The count of PRC distributed in Materials and Methods and Results section is significantly more than that in the structure of Introduction and Discussion, indicating that referees pay more attention to the Material and Methods and Results. The distribution of feature words of PRC in different structures is obviously different, which can reflect the content of referees' concern. There is no correlation between the distribution of PRC in different structures and the citations. Research limitations/implications: Due to the differences in the way referees write peer review reports, the rules used to extract position information cannot cover all PRC. Originality/value: The paper finds a pattern in the distribution of PRC in different academic article structures proving the long-term empirical understanding. It also provides insight into academic article writing: researchers should ensure the scientificity of methods and the reliability of results when writing academic article to obtain a high degree of recognition from referees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical research involves receiving questions that arise from curiosity and societal demands, formalizing them through scientific methods, deriving results, and answering these questions. Primarily, the Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework is used for formalization, and the flow from question to answer is presented in papers that follow the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (IMRAD) format. The Introduction presents the background and significance of the question, the Methods transform the question into a concrete research method based on the PICO, and the Results present the results corresponding to the methods. Finally, the Discussion compares existing research and clarifies the answer to the question. Healthcare professionals and medical researchers are expected to understand this structure as to read and write medical research papers effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although a relatively short text, the abstract of a paper summarizes the most important issues raised in the main text. The abstract is, at least initially, the key text on which journal editors, reviewers and eventually readers form their initial judgement on the overall quality of the full manuscript. Therefore, it is essential to execute this step of the writing process well. In this article, we discuss the purpose of an abstract, why it is important, and how to write a good abstract. Increasingly, journal abstracts are structured to follow the IMRAD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion). We provide examples of well written and badly written abstracts, with explanatory notes, to help readers understand the key points that need to be addressed and mistakes that should be avoided. Since international abstracts are generally written in English, preparing an abstract can be especially challenging for researchers who are not native speakers of English. We close this article with general linguistic advice, paying particular attention to key terms and word choice than can meaningfully express an author's intention in a concise way. The points raised in this article will help authors improve their scientific writing and enable their findings to be expressed with clarity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose/Thesis: The article studies the types of citations in research articles published in the journal Zagadnienia Informacji Naukowej -- Studia informacyjne (ZIN). Approach/Methods: The study applied a method of analysis of citations, supplemented by a typology of citations established by B. Peritz. The research set consisted of 34 research articles published in ZIN in 2016--2017. The study required a manual identification and categorization of the citations which featured in the set, and correlating their types with the location in the article and the type of the article. Results and conclusions: The results of the study showed significant variations in the distribution of the citations in the article, depending on the type of the article. A major part of the identified citations featured in the state of the art, and in general discussions. The authors studied often referred to other works to establish a general critical consensus regarding the research problems they analysed, to support their own hypotheses, or to suggest directions for further research. More than a half of the articles studied made no citations of methodological character. Originality/Value: The article analyses the functions of the citations in the rhetoric structure of a research article concerned with information science, and offers a methodological critique of the research processes and tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An original scientific article published in a peer‑reviewed professional journal of repute provides great personal satisfaction, adds stature and endows professional respectability to contributing authors. Various types of surgical publications that exist nowadays are case report, cohort study, case–control study, randomised controlled trial narrative review, systematic review, Cochrane review, meta‑analysis, editorials and leading articles. A study/research protocol is a standardised document, common to all research projects that typically comprise study objectives, study design, selection of participants, study intervention, study evaluations, safety assessments, statistics and participant rights committees. Once the study protocol is completed and reviewed, it is submitted to the local Institutional Review Board/Institutional Ethics Committee for approval. An outline of the levels of evidence and grades of recommendation is available from the Centre for evidence‑based medicine at the University of Oxford. A standardised, structured template exists for scientific presentations in the field of medicine which is also followed in medical writing and publications Introduction Methods Results And Discussion (IMRAD). Instructions to authors would normally include reference to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines for good and ethical publication practice. It is strongly advised to follow the recommended guidelines appropriate for the published study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Publishing original research in a peer-reviewed and indexed journal is an important milestone for a scientist or a clinician. It is an important parameter to assess academic achievements. However, technical and language barriers may prevent many enthusiasts from ever publishing. This review highlights the important preparatory steps for creating a good manuscript and the most widely used IMRaD (Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion) method for writing a good manuscript. It also provides a brief overview of the submission and review process of a manuscript for publishing in a biomedical journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we present a step-by-step guide on how to write a paper for successful publication in a peer-reviewed journal. We propose a ten-step approach to the entire process of paper writing from preparation, manuscript writing, and submission to the stages of peer-review and revision. The steps include defining paper objectives, authorship, journal selection, writing routines, requirements of manuscript sections, editing and proof-reading as well as how to communicate successfully in submission and review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using an outline to organize your writing project can help keep you on a straight path and avoid wandering into wastelands of irrelevance. There are various formats - the classic hierarchal model, the IMRAD system used for research reports, the disease description arrangement often found in clinical reviews, and various types of lists and categories. All help you organise your data and present it in a structured, coherent manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Writing a scientific manuscript is an important component of academic medicine. For most novice writers, this task may seem quite formidable. Discussion: This article will review the basic processes of writing a manuscript, with emphasis on the proper structure and organization of the article. The likelihood of a manuscript being accepted is highly dependent on its content and structure. A structured outline is the cornerstone of a successful manuscript. Conclusion: The current article presents the tools necessary for writing a successful manuscript. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The aim of the study described in this article is to examine the lexical characteristics of medical research articles in English. The article describes the results obtained from the analysis of a corpus of medical texts in which the use of verbs is studied in the different sections of the medical research article. After selecting a corpus of 30 texts and tagging them with a POS Tagger, concordances of verbs were obtained. The verbs were then classified according to their meaning in lexical domains. Results show that the lexical domains are distributed differently in each section of the article, reinforcing the rhetorical functions of each section. A proposal is also made for using these results in a more practical manner, for example to enrich an electronic manual, with information that could assist professionals and translators with the writing and translation of medical research articles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific writing has a proper format. The anatomical structure or important components of an original article consists of a structured abstract (usually in four sub-headings i.e. objective, methods, results and conclusions with appropriate key words), introduciton, methodology, results and discussion. It is summarized by the acronym IMRAD wherein: I stands for Introduction, M for Methods, R for Results, A for And, D for Discussion. This manuscript describes the information which has to be included in the Introduction and Discussion sections of an original article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]