Scientific writings

Biftu Geda (PhD)

Assistant Professor of Nursing and Public Health

June, 2019
Harar
 Learning objectives
1. Explain how to review literature
2. Describe the main characteristics of the scientific writing
3. Identify the elements of the scientific paper
4. Discuss the function, structure, and writing style of each element of
scientific paper
 Tips for Writing a Literature Review (1)
• Literature reviews inform you:
• the historical development of an issue,
• the current thinking and latest research, and
• provide direction for program development.
• A good literature review can help you to:
• focus your project,
• identify a conceptual framework,
• identify trends,
• prevent you from repeating flawed programs or methods.
• identify bias and
• explore arguments, if any, within the field.
• Most literature reviews take the following steps:
1. Determining the scope of your literature review
2. Identifying sources
3. Reading the sources
4. Evaluating the information
5. Organizing and writing the literature review
 Literature Review (2)
• Most of your time will be spent on researching and reading, not on the writing of the actual
review.
• The most important step is determining what you will not research.
• There are many interesting articles out there, but they will not all be relevant to your research.
• Narrowing your focus to a:
• specific population,
• geographic location,
• theory, or
• ethnic group will greatly improve your chances of finding useful information.
• Once you have identified the articles, read and analyze them, now you need to start organizing
the articles for your literature review.
• You can organize the articles in several ways, depending on the topic.
• For example, in an article about breastfeeding:
• you could start with overview articles that discuss breastfeeding prevalence and trends,
• then discuss articles that address the benefits and drawbacks to breastfeeding, and
• then discuss position papers from various organizations on breastfeeding.
 Identify search terms and search engines
• For example if you are interested in breast feeding, you can use different
search terms like:
• Breast feeding
• Prevalence of BF
• Trend of BF
• Benefits of BF etc.
• Search engines like:
• PubMed
• Hinary
• Medline
• Google Scholars etc.
Literature review (3)

Medical Subject Headings

 Conduct literature review
• Searching Finished?
• Did you organize either by EndNote or folder? It is must to do.
• Now you can start reading
• Start the paper
• Even before I do the study??
 Characteristics of scientific writings (1)
• The paper should be organized carefully and Follow the structure discussed
below.
1. Each section of your paper will be composed of paragraphs.
• Each paragraph should begin with a topic sentence which states the point you will
make in that paragraph.
• Every sentence after that should support the topic sentence.
• Paragraphs are typically 4 to 8 sentences long and each sentence should address only
one point.
• 2) Make your sentences simple, but vary their length to make the paper interesting.
• 3) Avoid the passive tense.
• An example of the passive tense is: "It was shown
• that.......". An example of the active tense is:
• "I have shown that ........."
• 4) Avoid contractions.
• These are for more informal writing, like that in this workbook.
• Say "cannot" instead of "can't".
 Characteristics of scientific writings (2)
• If a person can group his/her ideas, then s/he is a writer
• An excellent way to improve your writing is to choose good models
• Less is more when it comes to writing a good scientific paper.
• Tell a story in clear, simple language and keep in mind the importance of the big picture.
• To improve the paper, don’t rush the writing process.
 Developing a Systematic Approach
• Sentences should be:
• short,
• simple, and
• direct.
• So should the paper.
• But be aware that such brevity does
not come quickly or easily;
• it may require a great deal of time.
• A readable paper also requires an
obvious organization.
• Every paragraph needs a purpose.
• Describe it in the topic sentence, and
make sure every sentence is
congruent with that purpose.
• Paragraphs must be linked and
produce a sequence of thought that
reflects the “argument” for the
central message.
We can split the writing process into stages

Getting
Gettingin
inthe
theMood
Mood Writing
Writingthe
theFirst
FirstDraft
Draft

Revising,
Revising,Revising,
Revising,Revising
Revising Finishing
Finishing
Writing Process
Elements of the Scientific Research Paper
Proposal Manuscript
• Title • Title
• Summary • Abstract
• Introduction (…) • Introduction
• Literature review • Methods
• Methods • Results
• Work plan • Discussion
• Budget • Works Cited
• Works Cited • Appendices
• Appendices
 Proposal writing
• Introduction
• Background
• Problem statement
• Significance of the study
• Study rationale (justification)
• Hypothesis
• Research questions
• Objectives
• Literature review
• Introduction
• Outcome
• Factors
• Conceptual framework
Standard Scientific Research Paper Components
 Title (1)
• Title is the label of the paper.
• It will be read more than any other section of the paper.
• It tells you what the paper is about, with the main purpose of encouraging people to read the
paper.
• So, the title should be:
• informative,
• specific and
• concise (brief and suitable for indexing).
• Should contain key words for the benefit of information retrieval system.
• Make title informative by describing the subject of the research, not results of the research.
• Make the title specific by differentiating your research from others on the subject.
 Title (2)
• Make the title concise by limiting it to probably not more than 7-10 words.
• Only use technical terms if they are familiar to most readers and do not use abbreviations,
formulas and jargon, omit the verb in the title.
• Eliminate ‘waste words’, words that say nothing like:
• “Observations of …”,
• “Studies of …”,
• “Some notes…”,
• “Investigations of …” or
• “Examination of…”.
• The title is on a Cover Page
• All nouns are capitalized in the title
• The title is centered on the page
• Your names and date appear below the title
Childhood Disability in Rural Eastern Ethiopia: Community Based Survey

• Biftu Geda:
• Berhane Yemane
• Nega Assefa
• Alemayehu Worku

May, 2016
Haramaya Universisty
Harar, Ethiopia
 Abstract (1)
• The abstract is a one paragraph (<100 words) summary of the report, including:
• the question investigated,
• the methods used,
• the principal results and
• conclusions.
• Offers a complete but selective summary of most significant ideas and information
• Uses clear, precise wording (increase precision through successive revisions)
• Accurately reflects the paper's:
• organization,
• emphasis, and
• content on a very small scale

.
 Abstract (2)

Why do we write abstracts?

• Abstracts are a quick way for readers to understand your research project.
• Thus, readers can assess the relevance of your work to their own simply by
reading your abstract.
• Your intended audience should be able to understand the abstract without
having to read any of the report.
• Because the abstract is usually the first thing that readers read next to title,
and based on that abstract, make a judgment whether to keep reading or not,
• The abstract is one of the most important elements of a scientific report.
 Abstract
Background: The type and extent of childhood disability in Ethiopia is unknown due to lack of

accurate and reliable data. This study tried to assess the magnitude and types of disabilities

among children 0-14 years of age in eastern Ethiopia.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional community-based study among households that are

under demographic and health surveillance in eastern Ethiopia. The study population consisted

of all children aged 0-14 year. A structured questionnaire was used to assess the type and

severity of the disability.

Results: A total of 21,572 children in the age group 0-14 were screened for disability. Of which

586 (2.7%; 95% CI= 2.5%, 2.9%) had at least one kind of disability at the time of the survey.

The proportion of disability increased as children were older; measured by the extended Mantel-

Haenszel (M-H) chi square for linear trend (M-H=48.74; P<0.001). Hearing impairment was the

most common reported disability; 417 (71.2%; 95% CI=67.5%, 74.9%). Among children with a

disability, 179 (31.0%; 95% CI=27.3%, 34.7%) had a combination of multiple disabilities and

about a third, 200 (34.1%; 95% CI=30.3%, 37.9%) had developed the disability during infancy.

Magnitude of disability was higher among boys 335 (2.98%; 95% CIs=2.66%, 3.30%) compared

to girls 251 (2.44%; 95% CIs=2.14%, 2.74%).

Conclusion: Childhood disability is a health challenge in the study area and is already common

at an early age. Permanent disability among children may be prevented by an early screening

program in the routine child health services and adequate care, especially for hearing

impairment.

Key Words: Disability, childhood disability, children with disability, hearing impairment
 Introduction (1)
• The introduction is a brief section (no more than 1 page usually) designed to inform the reader
of the relevance of your research and includes
• a short history or relevant background that leads to a statement of the problem that is
being addressed.

• Introductions usually follow a funnel style, starting broadly and then narrowing.
• They funnel from something known, to something unknown, to the question the paper is
asking.

• focuses on the overall issue, problem, or question that your research addresses.
• What is the context of your study (i.e. how does this relate to other research)?

• provides sufficient context and background for the reader to understand and evaluate your
research.
 Introduction (2)
• Motivates the audience to read the paper and to care about the results.
• Help reviewers and editors judge the paper’s importance.
• Address why the work was done and, equally important, why the reader should care.

• The first paragraph describes the general problem or situation that motivated your work.
• The first sentence, in particular, must be strong and catch the reader’s attention.

• The second paragraph focuses on the specific problem that the research addresses.
• It may detail relevant issues with which readers are unfamiliar.
• This paragraph may also focus on gaps in the existing literature.

• The third paragraph describes the motivation behind the study itself.
• Introductions be short (eg, approximately 3-4 paragraphs in length).
 Components of introduction
• Background (3-4 pages-one page)
• Definition and description of the outcome variable
• Brief about magnitude and factors depending on the purpose of the study
• Direction of FMOH and WHO about your study
• Your stand about the background (conclusion)
• Problem statement (Four paragraphs-one page)
• Major problem related to the outcome variable /DV (What is known)
• What others did to solve the problem with argument specially on the method
section
• Gap you identified with justification
• Your intention on how to narrow the gap with justification
 Methods

• The Methods section chronologically describes the process you undertook to complete the
research.
• Be precise, complete, and concise;
• Include only relevant information—no unnecessary details.
• Details experimental procedures
• Describes techniques for tracking functional variables (timing etc.) and
• Rational for tracking those variables
• Explains analytical techniques used
• It includes reasons why the you took certain measurements or chose to use certain
equations.
 Results (1)

• Results are just the facts.

• DESCRIBES but DOES NOT INTERPRET (Report; don't discuss)
• The presentation of data may be either chronological, to correspond with the Methods, or in
the order of most to least importance.
• Organize logically and use headers to emphasize the ordered sections.
• Illustrate and summarize findings: organize data and emphasize trends and patterns with
appropriate visuals like tables, graphs. Figures etc
• Integrate visuals with text: the text offers claims and general statements that the visual details
support.
• There is text! The authors explain what is shown in each graph as well as interesting
anomalies.
• Visuals don't fully explain, so don't expect your readers to "get" what you mean by providing
a graph with no explanation.
• Negative results are results and worth including in your report.
 Tables and figures (1)
• Must communicate the findings more powerfully and economically than words
• Otherwise, say it in a sentence or two
• Need to stand-alone, without readers looking at text
• Write comprehensive titles-legends: up to 3 lines is often permissible
• Need a great deal of revising
• Present big picture, exclude noise
• “The ability to simplify means to eliminate the unnecessary so that the necessary may
speak.” Hans Hofman (painter-teacher)
• “Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Albert Einstein
• “The greatest value of a picture is when it forces us to notice what we never expected
to see.” John W. 1977
 Tables and figures (2)
• You should not reiterate in the text the same data that are also shown because the point of
creating a table/figure is to eliminate that type of information from the text.

• All abbreviations used should be explained in a legend underneath the table

• Identify in the text where the figure should be placed when it is time for the paper to go to
layout.
• Should not be embedded in the manuscript file; it depends on the journals

• Number figures in the order that they appear.

 English is the language for scholarly journals
• Editorial work by a proficient English proofreader.
• It is your responsibility to make sure that grammar and spelling errors have been corrected
before submission.
• Very little will stimulate frustration more from editors and peer reviewers than a manuscript
that has so many writing and format errors that it is difficult or impossible to read.
 Discussion
• Offers your summary about your findings.
• This is your chance to demonstrate your ability to synthesize, analyze, evaluate, interpret,
and reason effectively.
• Explain key limitations: questions left unanswered, major experimental constraints, lack of
correlation, negative results.
• Discuss agreement or contrast with previously published work; explain the significance
• Offer possible alternative hypotheses.
• Offer general conclusions, noting your reasoning and main supporting evidence.
• Recommend areas for future study and explain your choices.
• The authors link their findings to their interpretations.
• They explain WHY they think the results occurred.
• They hypothesize why certain results were unexpected.
• The Discussion is thoughtful and clearly written.
• You do not see overly ambitious interpretations or overly-technical language.
 Explain the Limitations of the Study
• Almost every study, no matter how good its design, has limitations.
• Noting them is not a sign of weakness;
• instead, it sends the message that the author has thought carefully about study
design and is open to alternative methods to answer the study question.
• In a good manuscript:
• the author notes the study limitations in order of importance,
• provides an indication of how those limitations may have affected the results, and
• Offers suggestions about how the study might be performed differently in the future
 Works Cited
• If you reference an outside source in your report, you should cite where you found that source.
• You should also cite sources which your reader, a fellow student, may be unfamiliar with.
• The appropriate style for citing sources depending on the type of journal/ institution guideline.
• Cite only material that you have actually read.
• References should be formatted and organized as indicated in the journal instructions for authors.
• The most common format in biomedical and health care journals is Vancouver, although a number
of public health journals use the social sciences format of the American Psychological Association.
• Haramaya University follows that of Harvard (Author, date)
• Use a reference manager software program or EndNote
Appendix
• Appendices include:
• The original data taken during the laboratory session, questionnaires etc.
• Appendices should be numbered A, B, C, etc.
 Other Writing Tips

• Keep it simple (the purpose of this report is to describe your PROCESS, not come to
any conclusions that will alter the world).
• Jargon confuses your reader; it doesn't make you sound smart
• You may write from the first person point of view ("I" or "we") if that sentence style
aids the reader in understanding your point better. (Active voice)
• BUT, remember you are not writing an autobiography, so try to use passive voice to
keep the focus on our research rather than on you.
• Words like "very" and "really" do not add significance. Simply say, for example, "This
findings was significant because . . ."
• You do not need to use phrases like "as stated above.
• " In written communication, readers generally don't need such pointers as they
remember what they've read previously in short reports.
• However, do reference figures and graphs:
 Format

• A Table of Contents is not required, but will help your readers find information more quickly.
• Standard margins.
• Use a conservative font.
• Number the pages.

Specific Tips for Report

• No more than 10 pages
• No more than 10 graphs.
• You can write a fine report with only 5 graphs.
Ten Principles to Improve the Likelihood of Publication of a Scientific
Manuscript
• Properly Organize the Manuscript
• Clearly State the Study Question and Study Rationale
• Explain the Materials and Methods in a Systematic Manner
• Structure the Materials and Methods and Results Sections in a Similar Manner
• Make the Discussion Section Concise
• Explain If—and Why—Your Study Results Are Important
• Avoid Over interpretation of the Results
• Explain the Limitations of the Study
• Account for Unexpected Results
• Fully Incorporate Reviewers’ Suggestions into a Revised Manuscript
 The top ten reasons for rejection of the manuscript

• Inappropriate or incomplete statistics;

• Over interpretation of results;
• Inappropriate or suboptimal instrumentation;
• Sample too small or biased;
• Text difficult to follow;
• Insufficient problem statement;
• Inaccurate or inconsistent data reported;
• Incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated review of the literature;
• Insufficient data presented; and
• Defective tables or figures.

The main strengths noted in accepted manuscripts were:

the importance or timeliness of the problem studied,
excellence of writing, and
soundness of study design. 
 THE PUBLICATION PROCESS
• Conduct literature review
• Start the paper
• Conduct study/analyze data
• Organize/summarize results succinctly
• Get early, frequent feedback (in
"chunks")
• Formulate your key message
• Apply the "new/useful" test
• Choose your target audience
• Choose your target journal
• Read journal instructions for authors
• Draft (and debug) an abstract
• Write the first draft
• Master the literature
• Relearn, rethink, rewrite
• . . . and rewrite and rewrite
• How long?
• Critically review and finalize the abstract
• Attend to the details
• Submit article to target journal
• Have a Plan B
• Mark your calendar
 Take home message

Clear, effective writing can be learned!

 Assignment
• Select a research title
• Set one general and two specific objectives
• Write an introduction of 5 paragraphs on one page