How to Read a Scientific Journal Article

J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2013 Jan-April; 17(one): 65–70.

Art of reading a journal article: Methodically and effectively

RV Subramanyam

Department of Oral Pathology, Drs Sudha and Nageswara Rao Siddhartha Institute of Dental Sciences, Gannavaram, Andhra Pradesh, Bharat

Abstract

Groundwork:

Reading scientific literature is mandatory for researchers and clinicians. With an overflow of medical and dental journals, it is essential to develop a method to choose and read the right articles.

Objective:

To outline a logical and orderly approach to reading a scientific manuscript. By breaking down the task into smaller, step-by-step components, one should be able to attain the skills to read a scientific article with ease.

Methods:

The reader should begin past reading the championship, abstract and conclusions first. If a decision is made to read the unabridged article, the primal elements of the article can be perused in a systematic fashion effectively and efficiently. A cogent and organized method is presented to read manufactures published in scientific journals.

Conclusion:

One can read and capeesh a scientific manuscript if a systematic approach is followed in a simple and logical manner.

Keywords: Articles, journal, reading, enquiry, systematic

INTRODUCTION

"Nosotros are drowning in information but starved for knowledge."

John Naisbitt

It has become essential for the clinicians, researchers, and students to read manufactures from scientific journals. This is not only to go along abreast of progress in the speciality concerned merely too to be aware of current trends in providing optimum healthcare to the patients. Reading scientific literature is a must for students interested in enquiry, for choosing their topics and conveying out their experiments. Scientific literature in that field volition help one empathize what has already been discovered and what questions remain unanswered and thus help in designing ane'southward inquiry project. Sackett (1981)[ane] and Durbin (2009)[2] suggested various reasons why most of us read journal articles and some of these are listed in Table 1.

Tabular array 1

Mutual reasons for reading periodical articles

The scientific literature is burgeoning at an exponential rate. Between 1978 and 1985, well-nigh 272,344 articles were published annually and listed in Medline. Between 1986 and 1993, this number reached 344,303 manufactures per year, and between 1994 and 2001, the figure has grown to 398,778 articles per yr.[three] To be updated with current knowledge, a doc practicing general medicine has to read 17 manufactures a twenty-four hour period, 365 days a year.[iv]

In spite of the cyberspace rapidly gaining a potent foothold as a quick source of obtaining data, reading journal articles, whether from impress or electronic media, still remains the near common mode of acquiring new information for most of us.[2] Newspaper reports or novels can be read in an insouciant mode, but reading enquiry reports and scientific articles requires concentration and meticulous approach. At present, there are 1312 dentistry journals listed in Pubmed.[5] How can one cull an commodity, read it purposefully, effectively, and systematically? The aim of this article is to provide an answer to this question by presenting an efficient and methodical approach to a scientific manuscript. However, the reader is informed that this paper is mainly intended for the amateur reader unaccustomed to scientific literature and not for the professional interested in critical appraisement of periodical articles.

TYPES OF JOURNAL Articles

Unlike types of papers are published in medical and dental journals. Ane should be aware of each kind; especially, when one is looking for a specific type of an article. Table two gives unlike categories of papers published in journals.

Table 2

Types of articles published in a periodical

In full general, scientific literature can be primary or secondary. Reports of original research form the "primary literature", the "core" of scientific publications. These are the articles written to nowadays findings on new scientific discoveries or describe earlier work to acknowledge it and place new findings in the proper perspective. "Secondary literature" includes review articles, books, editorials, exercise guidelines, and other forms of publication in which original research information is reviewed.[6] An article published in a peer-reviewed journal is more valued than one which is not.

An original research commodity should consist of the following headings: Structured abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) and may be Randomized Control Trial (RCT), Controlled Clinical Trial (CCT), Experiment, Survey, and Example-control or Cohort written report. Reviews could be non-systematic (narrative) or systematic. A narrative review is a broad overview of a topic without any specific question, more than or less an update, and qualitative summary. On the other paw, a systematic review typically addresses a specific question nearly a topic, details the methods past which papers were identified in the literature, uses predetermined criteria for selection of papers to exist included in the review, and qualitatively evaluates them. A meta-assay is a type of systematic review in which numeric results of several divide studies are statistically combined to determine the outcome of a specific research question.[7–nine] Some are invited reviews, requested by the Editor, from an expert in a item subject.

A instance study is a written report of a single clinical example, whereas, a case series is a description of a number of such cases. Case reports and case serial are description of disease (southward) generally considered rare or written report of heretofore unknown or unusual findings in a well-recognized condition, unique procedure, imaging technique, diagnostic test, or treatment method. Technical notes are description of new, innovative techniques, or modifications to existing procedures. A pictorial essay is a education article with images and legends but has express text. Commentary is a curt commodity on an author'due south personal stance of a specific topic and could be controversial. An editorial, written by the editor of the periodical or invited, can be perspective (almost articles published in that particular issue) or persuasive (arguing a specific indicate of view). Other articles published in a journal include messages to the editor, book reviews, briefing proceedings and abstracts, and abstracts from other journals.[ten]

WHAT TO READ IN A JOURNAL? – CHOOSING THE Right ARTICLE

Not all enquiry articles published are excellent, and information technology is pragmatic to decide if the quality of the study warrants reading of the manuscript. The first step for a reader is to choose a correct article for reading, depending on one'due south individual requirement. The next step is to read the selected commodity methodically and efficiently.[two] A uncomplicated controlling flowchart is depicted in [Figure 1], which helps i to decide the type of article to select. This flowchart is meant for i who has a specific intent of choosing a particular type of commodity and not for 1 who intends to scan through a journal.

Schematic flowchart of the first step in choosing an commodity to read

HOW TO START READING AN Article?

"At that place is an art of reading, besides as an art of thinking, and an art of writing."

Clarence Day

At first glance, a periodical article might appear intimidating for some or disruptive for others with its tables and graphs. Reading a research article tin exist a frustrating feel, especially for the 1 who has not mastered the art of reading scientific literature. Just like there is a method to extract a tooth or gear up a crenel, one can besides learn to read enquiry manufactures by post-obit a systematic approach. Most scientific articles are organized as follows:[two,11]

1. Title: Topic and information virtually the authors.

2. Abstract: Brief overview of the article.

3. Introduction: Background information and statement of the research hypothesis.

4. Methods: Details of how the report was conducted, procedures followed, instruments used and variables measured.

5. Results: All the data of the study along with figures, tables and/or graphs.

6. Discussion: The interpretation of the results and implications of the written report.

7. References/Bibliography: Citations of sources from where the information was obtained.

Review articles do not usually follow the to a higher place pattern, unless they are systematic reviews or meta-assay. The cardinal dominion is: Never outset reading an article from the first to the end. Information technology is better to begin past identifying the conclusions of the study by reading the title and the abstract.[12] If the article does not take an abstract, read the conclusions or the summary at the end of the article first. Afterward reading the abstruse or conclusions, if the reader deems it is interesting or useful, then the entire article can be read [Figure 2].

Decision-making flowchart to decide whether to read the chosen article or not

THE TITLE

Like the title of a pic which attracts a filmgoer, the title of the article is the one which attracts a reader in the starting time identify. A skilful championship will inform the potential reader a cracking bargain almost the study to decide whether to go ahead with the paper or dismiss it. About readers prefer titles that are descriptive and self-explanatory without having to look at the unabridged article to know what it is all near.[ii] For example, the paper entitled "Microwave processing – A approving for pathologists" gives an idea about the commodity in general to the reader. Simply at that place is no indication in the championship whether it is a review article on microwave processing or an original enquiry. If the championship had been "Comparing of Microwave with Conventional Tissue Processing on quality of histological sections", fifty-fifty the insouciant reader would accept a improve understanding of the content of the paper.

ABSTRACT

Abstract helps usa determine whether we should read the unabridged article or non. In fact, most journals provide abstract free of cost online assuasive united states of america to determine whether we need to buy the entire article. Near scientific journals at present have a structured abstruse with divide subheadings like introduction (groundwork or hypothesis), methods, results and conclusions making it easy for a reader to identify important parts of the study quickly.[13] Moreover, at that place is normally a brake about the number of words that can exist included in an abstract. This makes the abstract concise enough for i to read rapidly.

The abstruse can be read in a systematic mode by answering certain fundamental questions like what was the report about, why and how was the study conducted, the results and their inferences. The reader should brand a note of any questions that were raised while reading the abstract and exist certain that answers have been found later reading the entire commodity.[12]

Reading the entire article

Once the reader has decided to read the entire article, 1 can brainstorm with the introduction.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the introduction is to provide the rationale for conducting the report. This section normally starts with existing knowledge and previous enquiry of the topic under consideration. Typically, this department concludes with identification of gaps in the literature and how these gaps stimulated the researcher to design a new study.[12] A good introduction should provide proper groundwork for the written report. The aims and objectives are usually mentioned at the cease of the introduction. The reader should also determine whether a research hypothesis (study hypothesis) was stated and subsequently cheque whether it was answered under the word.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This section gives the technical details of how the experiments were carried out. In almost of the inquiry articles, all details are rarely included but at that place should be enough data to understand how the study was carried out.[12] Data about the number of subjects included in the report and their categorization, sampling methods, the inclusion criteria (who can be in) and exclusion criteria (who cannot be in) and the variables chosen tin be derived by reading this section. The reader should get acquainted with the procedures and equipment used for data collection and find out whether they were advisable.

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

In this department, the researchers give details about the data collected, either in the form of figures, tables and/or graphs. Ideally, interpretation of information should not be reported in this section, though statistical analyses are presented. The reader should meticulously get through this segment of the manuscript and find out whether the results were reliable (aforementioned results over fourth dimension) and valid (measure what it is supposed to mensurate). An important aspect is to cheque if all the subjects present in the beginning of the report were accounted for at the end of the study. If the answer is no, the reader should bank check whether any explanation was provided.

Results that were statistically significant and results that were not, must exist identified. One should also observe whether a correct statistical test was employed for analysis and was the level of significance appropriate for the written report. To appreciate the choice of a statistical test, 1 requires an understanding of the hypothesis beingness tested.[14,15] Tabular array iii provides a list of commonly used statistical tests used in scientific publications. Description and estimation of these tests is beyond the scope of this paper. It is wise to recollect the following communication: It is not only important to know whether a difference or association is statistically significant but too appreciate whether it is large or substantial enough to be useful clinically.[16] In other words, what is statistically significant may not be clinically significant.

Table 3

Basic statistics commonly used in scientific publications

DISCUSSION

This is the about important department of the article where the enquiry questions are answered and the meaning of assay and interpretation of the data are presented. Usually the study results are compared with other studies, explaining in what aspects they were unlike or similar. Ideally, no new data should be presented under discussion and no data from other sections should exist repeated.[2] In addition, this section also discusses the various strengths and limitations/shortcomings of the written report, providing suggestions about areas that need additional research.

The pregnant of results and their analyses, new theories or hypotheses, limitations of the study, explanation of differences and similarities with other comparable studies, and suggestions for future research are offered in this section. Information technology is important to remember that the discussions are the authors' interpretations and opinions and non necessarily facts.

READING THE CONCLUSION (AGAIN !)

Though conclusion part had been read at the start, it is prudent to read it again at the end to confirm whether what we had inferred initially is right. If the decision had not fabricated sense earlier, it may make sense after having perused through the entire article. Sometimes, the study conclusions are included in the discussion section and may not be like shooting fish in a barrel to locate. The questions that can be asked under various sub-headings of an original research paper are presented as a unproblematic questionnaire in Tabular array 4. It is causeless that one who is using this questionnaire has read and analyzed the abstract and then decided to read the entire article. This questionnaire does not critically analyze a scientific commodity. However, answers to these questions provide a systematic approach to obtain a broad overview of the manuscript, especially to a novice. If one who is new to reading articles, writing answers to these questions and taking notes volition help in agreement most aspects of a research article.

Tabular array 4

Questionnaire for original inquiry articles

Decision

"Let us read with method, and propose to ourselves an end to which our studies may indicate. The use of reading is to aid us in thinking."

Edward Gibbon

It has become mandatory to read scientific literature to be well-informed of ever-expanding information and/or for better diagnosis, prognosis and therapy. Since at that place is an abundance of journals and articles, it is disquisitional to develop a modus operandi for achieving a rapid, purposeful, effective and useful method to read these manuscripts. A simple but efficient and logical arroyo to scientific literature has been presented hither for choosing articles and reading them systematically and effectively for a better understanding.

Footnotes

Source of Support: Nil.

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

REFERENCES

1. How to read clinical journals: I. Why to read them and how to start reading them critically. Tin can Med Assoc J. 1981;124:555–eight. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Durbin CG., Jr How to read a scientific research paper. Respir Care. 2009;54:1366–71. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Druss BG, Marcus SC. Growth and decentralization of the medical literature: Implications for prove-based medicine. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005;93:499–501. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Hersh West. Data Retrieval: A Wellness and Biomedical Perspective (Health Informatics) 3rd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2009. p. 68. lxxx, 85. [Google Scholar]

vii. Callcut RA, Branson RD. How to read a review paper. Respir Intendance. 2009;54:1379–1385. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Greenhalgh T. Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analyses) BMJ. 1997;315:672–5. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Peh WC, Ng KH. Bones construction and types of scientific papers. Singapore Med J. 2008;49:522–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Hudson-Barr D. How to read a research commodity. J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2004;9:70–2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. International Commission of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication. [Final accessed on 2011 Oct x]. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html .

14. Hess DR. How to write an constructive discussion. Respir Intendance. 2004;49:1238–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

xv. Das R, Das PN. Biomedical Research Methodology including Biostatistical Applications. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publications (P) Ltd; 2011. pp. 123–45. [Google Scholar]

sixteen. Riegelman RK. Studying a Written report and Testing a Examination: How to read the medical evidence. fifth ed. Philadelphia, U.s.: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2005. p. 45. [Google Scholar]

johnsonworeuthe.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3687192/

Share this post