HOW TO WRITE A PUBLISHABLE PAPER FROM THE

HOW TO WRITE A PUBLISHABLE PAPER: FROM THE TITLE TO REFERENCES By Prof. Vincent Onywera Registrar (Research, Innovation & Outreach) KENYATTA UNIVERSITY

Presentation outline 1. What is a good manuscript? 2. What makes a good paper? 3. Parts of a manuscript 4. Writing strategies

What is a good manuscript? A good manuscript is one that makes reader(s) grasp the scientific significance as EASILY as possible.

What’s A Good Manuscript? Title descriptive and specific Abstract descriptive, specific, and correct length Introduction and background short and strong Research question clearly stated Literature cited is comprehensive and relevant Methods descriptive enough to be replicated; appropriate statistical analyses Figures and Tables stand on their own, support conclusions, well constructed Citations relevant to topic Discussion within boundaries of findings; demonstrate how findings have helped resolve stated problem; implications and future work addressed Writing clear and logical Manuscript follows journal guidelines

Writing is an Essential Skill n The ability to communicate clearly and precisely through the written word is an essential skill for researchers n Delayed publications and denial of funding because of poorly written manuscripts and grants continues to affect many researchers especially in developing countries n The career of a researcher can depend heavily on this skill

The Paper n Writing and editing the paper is the last step in the research process n The paper tells the story from study inception, through data collection, statistical analysis, findings and discussion n The process of writing the paper should be analogous to the research process—it requires attention to detail, time, and revision

The Title

The Title n First reviewed by Journal Editors before abstract n Short n Specific, Relevant, Descriptive n Written last—your findings and conclusions may alter your title

Title: Ask Yourself n What is the single most important point of this study? n How would I tell my colleague, in one short descriptive sentence: what’s this study about? n A descriptive, specific title perfectly framing your study will be apparent only after you’ve written the paper and abstract. n Start with a short descriptive working title

Unnecessary Title Phrases n A Study of… A Study to Determine Results of… n An Innovative Method… n Contributions to (of)… n Investigations on (concerning, about)… n Observations on… n A Trial Comparing…

Examples

The Abstract

The Abstract n 1 st Impression to journal editor and the reader! n Follow the Journal’s Guidelines n Most abstracts are often too long: ≤ 250 words: Cannot upload your paper! n Structure it (outline it) “The abstract is the single most important part of a manuscript, yet the most often poorly written” -JAMA Editor

The Abstract n First looked at by editors/sometimes only thing read by readers n Summarizes the main points succinctly: n Background/Significance n Objective n Study design, method n Primary useful results n Principal conclusions, implications n Do NOT be vague—be substantive and brief

Abstract n Emphasize methods, main results, and conclusion n Introduction/purpose: 1 short sentence n Put objective as imperative style: n Objective: To evaluate whether zinc supplementation during pregnancy affects infant birth measures. n Methods, Results: 2 -4 sentences n Conclusion: 1 -2 sentences

The Introduction

Introduction n Why did you carry out this research? State the specific purpose or rationale for the study. n What is the existing state of knowledge of this topic? Synthesize information tracing the development of the problem and summarize its current state…ie, the background. n What’s known? n What’s unknown? n What are the gaps in knowledge this study will fill? n Give only strictly pertinent references.

Introduction n This is a vital part of your paper—it convinces (or not) the reader whether your study: n Has merit and asks important research questions n Is focused and supported by relevant recent citations n Is ultimately important to body of knowledge n Reviewers and editors will judge the paper’s importance in the introduction.

The Methods

Methods n Editors/Reviewers judge the study on whether your methods are adequate to answer your specific objective, aim or hypothesis n Rationale for choosing procedures/tests n The pivotal point to judge whether the results are valid n Methods usually the weakest section n Often deficient in detail, not providing enough information to replicate the study n Statistical shortcomings

The Results

Results n n n The heart of your paper Write after figures and tables are constructed n Consider your data critically n Construct tables, figures and include them in outline n Write the results n Use su-bheadings Results determine n Whether you’ve answered your original question(s) n Your direction for future studies n Both of which belong in the discussion

Results n State ALL the findings n Whether significant or not n Without bias or interpretation n Do not include weaknesses, strengths of study, ie don’t discuss results n List results in order listed in methods n Use logical headers and group your findings n Characteristics of study subjects n Findings in order listed in methods n General to specific n Use past tense n Results confirm or reject your hypothesis: they do not prove anything.

Therefore Results: 1. Short and to the point—Main or most important findings first 2. Present only data directly relevant to the study—focus 3. Don’t repeat methods but you may remind the reader briefly how you measured something. 4. Allow the data to speak for itself—use tables/figures — construct them first and use as a basis for writing 5. Present absolute numbers and percentages so reviewers can judge the significance of the findings.

The discussion and conclusion

Discussion Construction 1. Summarize major findings— 1 st paragraph 2. Explain how your findings relate to those of others—what do they mean? 3. Limitations and how this influenced your study? Ø How will you overcome these in the next studies? 4. Explain the implications of findings 5. What future direction(s) will you take?

Discussion—Common Mistakes 1. Unwarranted speculations 2. Injecting divergent issues 3. Conclusions not supported by the data 4. Not suggesting future directions for research

Tables & Figures

Tables and Figures n Critical to a paper—Editors and readers look at these before reading the paper! n Editors judge your paper on how well these are constructed n Stand alone and tell a complete story n Unambiguous—immediately clear n Eliminate numerical data and long explanations in text n Figures display important trends, procedures, simplify detailed data, and show basic methodologies.

Bar or Line Graphs-Colors? This graph n will appear in the journal like this: Journals DO NOT allow color graphs unless they are necessary for understanding the graph

References

Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit, including those obtained through confidential review of others’ research proposals and manuscripts. Federal Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1999 Researchers therefore need to provide references and citations of what they have actually read.

n Plagiarism: Tempting short-cut with long-term consequences n Plagiarism is considered a serious offense by your institute, by journal editors and by the scientific community. n Plagiarism may result in academic charges, but will certainly cause rejection of your paper. n Plagiarism will hurt your reputation in the scientific community.

1. Researchers therefore need to provide references and citations of what they have actually read. 2. Different journals will referencing formats have different

Writing Deficiencies Most commonly cited by journal editors n Wordiness and redundancies n Cut, condense, combine n Poor flow of ideas n Outline to catch logic problems n Poor syntax and grammar n Consult an editor n Excessive abstraction n Be specific and descriptive n Unnecessary complexity n Keep it simple and direct n Excessive compression n Do not overly compress writing n Unnecessary qualification n Qualify statements as necessary Byrne, D. Science Editor 23: 2, 2000

My advise is? • • • Attention to details Check and double check your work Consider the reviews English must be as good as possible Presentation is important Take your time with revision Acknowledge those who have helped you New, original and previously unpublished Critically evaluate your own manuscript Ethical rules must be obeyed

Thank you