How to Read a Scientific

Article?

CHECKLIST

ABSTRACT / SUMMARY
 purpose or rationale of study (why they did it)
 methodology (how they did it)
 results (what they found)
 conclusion (what it means)

INTRODUCTION
Introductions serve two purposes: creating readers’ interest in the subject and providing
them with enough information to understand the article. Generally, introductions
accomplish this by leading readers from broad information (what is known about the
topic) to more specific information (what is not known) to a focal point (what question the
authors asked and answered). Thus, authors describe previous work that led to current
understanding of the topic (the broad) and then situate their work (the specific) within the
field.

METHODS
The Methods section tells the reader what experiments were done to answer the question
stated in the Introduction. Read the Methods section carefully.

1. Were the methods described in sufficient detail for others to repeat or extend the
study?
2. If standard methods were used, were adequate references given?
3. If methods were modified, were the modifications described carefully?
4. Have the authors indicated the reasons why particular procedures were used?
5. Have the authors indicated clearly the potential problems with the methods used?
6. Have the authors indicated the limitations of the methods used?
7. Have the sources of the drugs been given?
8. Have the authors specified the statistical procedures used?
9. Are the statistical methods used appropriate?

RESULTS
The Results section contains results—statements of what was found, and reference to the data
shown in visuals (figures and tables). Normally, authors do not include information that would
need to be referenced, such as comparison to others’ results. Instead, that material is placed in
the Discussion—placing the work in context of the broader field.

1. Were the experiments done appropriate with respect to objectives of the study?
2. Do the results obtained make sense?
3. Do the legends to the figures describe clearly the data obtained?
4. Are the data presented in tabular form clear?
5. Are the legends to the tables clear?
6. Has appropriate statistical analysis been performed on the data?

DISCUSSION
The Discussion also functions to provide a clear answer to the question posed in the
Introduction and to explain how the results support that conclusion.

1. Were the objectives of the study met?

2. Do the authors discuss their results in relation to available information?
3. Do the authors indulge in needless speculation?
4. If the results obtained were statistically significant, were they also biologically
significant?
5. If the objectives were not met, do the authors have any explanation?
6. Do the authors adequately interpret their data?
7. Do the authors discuss the limitations of the methods used?
8. Do the authors discuss only data presented or do they refer consistently to
unpublished work?

REFERENCES
1. Do the authors cite appropriate papers for comments made?
2. Do the authors cite their own publications needlessly?