In this post, I aim to summarize the key points from the journal article “How to Write a Scientific Article” by Barbara J. Hoogenboom and Robert C. Manske, which offers practical advice for successfully writing and submitting scientific manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals. The authors stress the significance of clear communication and effective writing skills in advancing evidence-based practice and scientific thinking. They cover various aspects of manuscript preparation, general writing tips, and important content sections.
The introduction emphasizes the importance of publishing research findings in peer-reviewed journals to positively impact the scientific community and clinical decision-making. The authors recognize that writing a scientific paper can be challenging, particularly for inexperienced authors due to various barriers. Nevertheless, they assert that effective writing skills can be honed with practice.
The article provides valuable tips on manuscript preparation and advises authors to identify a specific target journal and adhere to its submission criteria. The recommended IMRaD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) helps structure scientific manuscripts.
The authors emphasize the need for clear and accurate expression of ideas and research information. They caution against excessive use of jargon and recommend avoiding first-person language, which might contradict certain viewpoints from other sources.
Seeking a reading mentor and obtaining feedback on the manuscript before submission are encouraged, particularly for novice writers.
The article highlights the significance of using figures, graphics, and videos to enhance research presentations. Proper citation and avoiding plagiarism are deemed essential in scientific writing.
The content section discusses key elements like the abstract, introduction, review of literature, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions. The abstract is deemed critical as it often determines whether readers will continue reading the paper. The introduction should clearly state the research question and justify the study’s significance.
The methods section should provide sufficient detail for replication of the study, including mentioning ethical approval. The results section should present findings without interpretation, while the discussion section should contextualize results by comparing them with existing evidence.
In conclusion, the article encourages scholarly writing as a rewarding endeavor that contributes to scientific knowledge and evidence-based practice. It provides valuable insights and practical tips for authors, especially those new to scientific writing, to successfully navigate the publication process and produce high-quality manuscripts.
It’s worth noting that while most of the article aligns with what I learned in a “Writing in the Sciences” MOOC on Coursera, there may be some differences in opinions regarding the use of first-person language, as it can vary depending on the journal’s preferences and the author’s writing style.
Reference
Hoogenboom BJ, Manske RC. How to write a scientific article. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Oct;7(5):512-7. PMID: 23091783; PMCID: PMC3474301.