When Reading a Scholarly Article, What Section Should You Read Last?
J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2013 January-April; 17(i): 65–seventy.
Art of reading a journal commodity: Methodically and effectively
RV Subramanyam
Department of Oral Pathology, Drs Sudha and Nageswara Rao Siddhartha Institute of Dental Sciences, Gannavaram, Andhra Pradesh, Bharat
Abstract
Background:
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 manufactures.
Objective:
To outline a logical and orderly approach to reading a scientific manuscript. By breaking down the task into smaller, step-past-footstep components, one should be able to accomplish the skills to read a scientific article with ease.
Methods:
The reader should begin by reading the title, abstract and conclusions first. If a decision is made to read the entire commodity, the key elements of the commodity can be perused in a systematic manner finer and efficiently. A denoting and organized method is presented to read articles published in scientific journals.
Conclusion:
Ane can read and appreciate a scientific manuscript if a systematic arroyo is followed in a simple and logical style.
Keywords: Articles, journal, reading, inquiry, systematic
INTRODUCTION
"We are drowning in information but starved for knowledge."
John Naisbitt
It has become essential for the clinicians, researchers, and students to read articles from scientific journals. This is not merely to keep abreast of progress in the speciality concerned but besides to be enlightened of current trends in providing optimum healthcare to the patients. Reading scientific literature is a must for students interested in research, for choosing their topics and conveying out their experiments. Scientific literature in that field will aid one understand what has already been discovered and what questions remain unanswered and thus help in designing ane's enquiry project. Sackett (1981)[1] and Durbin (2009)[2] suggested diverse reasons why most of u.s.a. read journal articles and some of these are listed in Table one.
Tabular array 1
Common reasons for reading journal articles
The scientific literature is burgeoning at an exponential rate. Between 1978 and 1985, nearly 272,344 manufactures were published annually and listed in Medline. Between 1986 and 1993, this number reached 344,303 articles per yr, and between 1994 and 2001, the figure has grown to 398,778 manufactures per year.[3] To be updated with electric current knowledge, a physician practicing general medicine has to read 17 articles a solar day, 365 days a year.[4]
In spite of the net quickly gaining a strong foothold as a quick source of obtaining information, reading journal manufactures, whether from print or electronic media, notwithstanding remains the near mutual style of acquiring new information for nearly of us.[2] Newspaper reports or novels can be read in an insouciant manner, simply reading enquiry reports and scientific articles requires concentration and meticulous approach. Now, there are 1312 dentistry journals listed in Pubmed.[5] How can one choose an article, read information technology purposefully, finer, 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. Even so, the reader is informed that this paper is mainly intended for the apprentice reader unaccustomed to scientific literature and not for the professional person interested in critical appraisement of journal articles.
TYPES OF JOURNAL ARTICLES
Different types of papers are published in medical and dental journals. One should be enlightened of each kind; peculiarly, when ane is looking for a specific type of an article. Table 2 gives different categories of papers published in journals.
Table 2
Types of manufactures published in a journal
In general, scientific literature can exist primary or secondary. Reports of original inquiry class the "primary literature", the "core" of scientific publications. These are the articles written to present 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, practice guidelines, and other forms of publication in which original research data is reviewed.[6] An commodity published in a peer-reviewed journal is more than valued than one which is non.
An original enquiry commodity should consist of the following headings: Structured abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) and may be Randomized Command Trial (RCT), Controlled Clinical Trial (CCT), Experiment, Survey, and Case-control or Cohort study. Reviews could be non-systematic (narrative) or systematic. A narrative review is a wide overview of a topic without whatsoever specific question, more or less an update, and qualitative summary. On the other hand, a systematic review typically addresses a specific question most a topic, details the methods by which papers were identified in the literature, uses predetermined criteria for selection of papers to be included in the review, and qualitatively evaluates them. A meta-analysis is a type of systematic review in which numeric results of several carve up studies are statistically combined to determine the issue of a specific enquiry question.[7–nine] Some are invited reviews, requested by the Editor, from an practiced in a particular field of study.
A example study is a report of a unmarried clinical instance, whereas, a case series is a clarification of a number of such cases. Case reports and case series are description of disease (s) generally considered rare or study of heretofore unknown or unusual findings in a well-recognized status, unique process, 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 educational activity article with images and legends but has express text. Commentary is a brusque article on an writer'south personal opinion of a specific topic and could exist controversial. An editorial, written by the editor of the journal or invited, tin be perspective (almost articles published in that detail issue) or persuasive (arguing a specific point of view). Other articles published in a journal include messages to the editor, volume reviews, conference proceedings and abstracts, and abstracts from other journals.[ten]
WHAT TO READ IN A JOURNAL? – CHOOSING THE Right ARTICLE
Non all enquiry articles published are splendid, and it is pragmatic to determine if the quality of the study warrants reading of the manuscript. The showtime step for a reader is to choose a right article for reading, depending on one'due south individual requirement. The next stride is to read the selected article methodically and efficiently.[2] A simple decision-making flowchart is depicted in [Figure 1], which helps one to decide the blazon of article to select. This flowchart is meant for one who has a specific intent of choosing a detail type of article and not for one who intends to browse through a journal.
Schematic flowchart of the first step in choosing an commodity to read
HOW TO START READING AN Article?
"There is an art of reading, too as an art of thinking, and an fine art of writing."
Clarence Twenty-four hours
At first glance, a journal article might appear intimidating for some or confusing for others with its tables and graphs. Reading a research article tin can be a frustrating feel, specially for the one who has not mastered the art of reading scientific literature. Just like there is a method to excerpt a tooth or prepare a cavity, one can also larn to read enquiry articles by post-obit a systematic approach. Most scientific articles are organized as follows:[ii,eleven]
-
Title: Topic and data about the authors.
-
Abstract: Brief overview of the article.
-
Introduction: Background information and argument of the research hypothesis.
-
Methods: Details of how the written report was conducted, procedures followed, instruments used and variables measured.
-
Results: All the data of the study along with figures, tables and/or graphs.
-
Give-and-take: The interpretation of the results and implications of the study.
-
References/Bibliography: Citations of sources from where the information was obtained.
Review articles do non usually follow the above pattern, unless they are systematic reviews or meta-analysis. The key rule is: Never starting time reading an article from the outset to the finish. Information technology is amend to brainstorm by identifying the conclusions of the study by reading the title and the abstruse.[12] If the commodity does non have an abstract, read the conclusions or the summary at the stop of the article beginning. After reading the abstract or conclusions, if the reader deems it is interesting or useful, then the unabridged commodity can exist read [Figure 2].
Decision-making flowchart to make up one's mind whether to read the chosen article or non
THE TITLE
Like the title of a movie which attracts a filmgoer, the title of the article is the one which attracts a reader in the starting time place. A good title will inform the potential reader a corking deal about the study to decide whether to become alee with the paper or dismiss information technology. Most readers prefer titles that are descriptive and cocky-explanatory without having to look at the entire article to know what it is all about.[2] For case, the paper entitled "Microwave processing – A blessing for pathologists" gives an idea well-nigh the commodity in full general to the reader. But at that place is no indication in the title whether information technology is a review article on microwave processing or an original research. If the title had been "Comparison of Microwave with Conventional Tissue Processing on quality of histological sections", even the insouciant reader would accept a improve understanding of the content of the newspaper.
ABSTRACT
Abstract helps us determine whether we should read the entire article or not. In fact, most journals provide abstruse free of toll online allowing us to decide whether we demand to purchase the unabridged article. Nearly scientific journals now have a structured abstruse with separate subheadings like introduction (groundwork or hypothesis), methods, results and conclusions making it easy for a reader to identify important parts of the study quickly.[thirteen] Moreover, there is normally a restriction most the number of words that can be included in an abstruse. This makes the abstract concise enough for one to read speedily.
The abstract can exist read in a systematic way by answering certain fundamental questions like what was the written report about, why and how was the study conducted, the results and their inferences. The reader should make a note of whatsoever questions that were raised while reading the abstract and be certain that answers accept been found subsequently reading the entire article.[12]
Reading the entire article
In one case the reader has decided to read the unabridged commodity, one can begin with the introduction.
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the introduction is to provide the rationale for conducting the study. This section usually starts with existing knowledge and previous research of the topic nether consideration. Typically, this section concludes with identification of gaps in the literature and how these gaps stimulated the researcher to design a new study.[12] A adept introduction should provide proper background for the study. The aims and objectives are usually mentioned at the stop of the introduction. The reader should also make up one's mind whether a research hypothesis (study hypothesis) was stated and later on check whether it was answered under the discussion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This section gives the technical details of how the experiments were carried out. In most of the research manufactures, all details are rarely included but at that place should be enough information to empathise how the study was carried out.[12] Information about the number of subjects included in the report and their categorization, sampling methods, the inclusion criteria (who tin can be in) and exclusion criteria (who cannot be in) and the variables called can be derived by reading this department. The reader should get acquainted with the procedures and equipment used for data collection and observe out whether they were appropriate.
RESULTS OF THE STUDY
In this department, the researchers give details about the data collected, either in the class of figures, tables and/or graphs. Ideally, estimation of data 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 (same results over time) and valid (measure what it is supposed to measure). An of import aspect is to bank check if all the subjects present in the commencement of the report were deemed for at the terminate of the written report. If the answer is no, the reader should check whether any explanation was provided.
Results that were statistically significant and results that were not, must be identified. One should as well observe whether a correct statistical exam was employed for analysis and was the level of significance appropriate for the study. To appreciate the selection of a statistical test, 1 requires an understanding of the hypothesis being tested.[fourteen,15] Table 3 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 recall the following advice: It is not merely important to know whether a difference or association is statistically significant but also appreciate whether it is large or substantial enough to exist useful clinically.[xvi] In other words, what is statistically significant may not be clinically significant.
Tabular array iii
Basic statistics commonly used in scientific publications
DISCUSSION
This is the most important section of the article where the inquiry questions are answered and the meaning of analysis and interpretation of the data are presented. Usually the study results are compared with other studies, explaining in what aspects they were dissimilar or similar. Ideally, no new data should be presented nether give-and-take and no information from other sections should be repeated.[2] In add-on, this section besides discusses the various strengths and limitations/shortcomings of the study, providing suggestions well-nigh areas that demand 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 retrieve that the discussions are the authors' interpretations and opinions and not necessarily facts.
READING THE Conclusion (Over again !)
Though conclusion part had been read at the starting time, it is prudent to read it over again at the end to confirm whether what we had inferred initially is right. If the conclusion had non fabricated sense earlier, it may make sense afterwards having perused through the entire article. Sometimes, the study conclusions are included in the discussion section and may not be easy to locate. The questions that can be asked nether diverse sub-headings of an original inquiry newspaper are presented as a simple questionnaire in Table 4. Information technology 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 article. Still, answers to these questions provide a systematic approach to obtain a broad overview of the manuscript, specially to a novice. If ane who is new to reading articles, writing answers to these questions and taking notes will help in understanding most aspects of a research article.
Tabular array 4
Questionnaire for original research articles
CONCLUSION
"Let us read with method, and propose to ourselves an end to which our studies may point. The use of reading is to assist u.s. in thinking."
Edward Gibbon
It has become mandatory to read scientific literature to be well-informed of always-expanding information and/or for better diagnosis, prognosis and therapy. Since in that location is an abundance of journals and articles, it is critical to develop a modus operandi for achieving a rapid, purposeful, effective and useful method to read these manuscripts. A elementary just efficient and logical arroyo to scientific literature has been presented here for choosing articles and reading them systematically and effectively for a improve understanding.
Footnotes
Source of Support: Nil.
Disharmonize of Interest: None alleged.
REFERENCES
1. How to read clinical journals: I. Why to read them and how to start reading them critically. Can Med Assoc J. 1981;124:555–8. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Durbin CG., Jr How to read a scientific research newspaper. Respir Intendance. 2009;54:1366–71. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
iii. Druss BG, Marcus SC. Growth and decentralization of the medical literature: Implications for bear witness-based medicine. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005;93:499–501. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Hersh Due west. Data Retrieval: A Health and Biomedical Perspective (Wellness Informatics) 3rd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2009. p. 68. 80, 85. [Google Scholar]
7. Callcut RA, Branson RD. How to read a review paper. Respir Care. 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 free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Peh WC, Ng KH. Basic structure and types of scientific papers. Singapore Med J. 2008;49:522–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Hudson-Barr D. How to read a inquiry article. J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2004;9:70–two. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication. [Terminal accessed on 2011 Oct 10]. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html .
14. Hess DR. How to write an effective discussion. Respir Care. 2004;49:1238–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Das R, Das PN. Biomedical Research Methodology including Biostatistical Applications. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publications (P) Ltd; 2011. pp. 123–45. [Google Scholar]
16. Riegelman RK. Studying a Study and Testing a Test: How to read the medical evidence. 5th ed. Philadelphia, U.s.a.: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2005. p. 45. [Google Scholar]
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3687192/