What Is the Value of Reading an Old Scientific Paper

J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2013 January-Apr; 17(i): 65–70.

Art of reading a periodical article: Methodically and finer

RV Subramanyam

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

Abstract

Background:

Reading scientific literature is mandatory for researchers and clinicians. With an overflow of medical and dental journals, information technology 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. Past breaking downwardly the job into smaller, pace-past-step components, 1 should be able to reach the skills to read a scientific commodity with ease.

Methods:

The reader should brainstorm by reading the title, abstract and conclusions first. If a decision is made to read the entire article, the key elements of the article tin can be perused in a systematic manner effectively and efficiently. A cogent and organized method is presented to read articles published in scientific journals.

Decision:

One tin read and appreciate a scientific manuscript if a systematic arroyo is followed in a elementary and logical manner.

Keywords: Articles, journal, reading, research, systematic

INTRODUCTION

"We are drowning in data but starved for knowledge."

John Naisbitt

It has become essential for the clinicians, researchers, and students to read articles from scientific journals. This is non simply to keep abreast of progress in the speciality concerned but also to be aware 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 carrying out their experiments. Scientific literature in that field will assist one understand what has already been discovered and what questions remain unanswered and thus help in designing one'south research project. Sackett (1981)[1] and Durbin (2009)[2] suggested various reasons why near of u.s. read periodical articles and some of these are listed in Table 1.

Table one

Common reasons for reading journal manufactures

The scientific literature is burgeoning at an exponential rate. Betwixt 1978 and 1985, most 272,344 articles were published annually and listed in Medline. Betwixt 1986 and 1993, this number reached 344,303 articles per yr, and between 1994 and 2001, the figure has grown to 398,778 articles per year.[3] To be updated with current knowledge, a physician practicing full general medicine has to read 17 articles a mean solar day, 365 days a twelvemonth.[four]

In spite of the cyberspace speedily gaining a strong foothold as a quick source of obtaining information, reading journal articles, whether from impress or electronic media, yet remains the about common way of acquiring new information for nigh of the states.[2] Paper reports or novels can be read in an insouciant manner, but reading research reports and scientific articles requires concentration and meticulous approach. At present, there are 1312 dentistry journals listed in Pubmed.[5] How can one choose 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 arroyo to a scientific manuscript. Even so, the reader is informed that this newspaper is mainly intended for the amateur reader unaccustomed to scientific literature and non for the professional interested in critical appraisal of periodical articles.

TYPES OF JOURNAL Manufactures

Dissimilar types of papers are published in medical and dental journals. One should exist aware of each kind; peculiarly, when 1 is looking for a specific blazon of an commodity. Tabular array 2 gives different categories of papers published in journals.

Table 2

Types of articles published in a periodical

In general, scientific literature can be master or secondary. Reports of original research form the "primary literature", the "cadre" of scientific publications. These are the articles written to present findings on new scientific discoveries or draw earlier piece of 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 than valued than i which is not.

An original enquiry article should consist of the following headings: Structured abstract, introduction, methods, results, and word (IMRAD) and may be Randomized Control Trial (RCT), Controlled Clinical Trial (CCT), Experiment, Survey, and Example-control or Cohort report. Reviews could be not-systematic (narrative) or systematic. A narrative review is a broad 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 about a topic, details the methods by 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-analysis is a type of systematic review in which numeric results of several separate studies are statistically combined to decide the effect of a specific research question.[seven–9] Some are invited reviews, requested by the Editor, from an skillful in a particular field of study.

A example study is a study of a unmarried clinical instance, whereas, a case series is a description of a number of such cases. Case reports and example series are description of illness (south) generally considered rare or report of heretofore unknown or unusual findings in a well-recognized condition, unique process, imaging technique, diagnostic examination, or handling method. Technical notes are description of new, innovative techniques, or modifications to existing procedures. A pictorial essay is a educational activity commodity with images and legends but has limited text. Commentary is a brusque article on an author'south personal opinion of a specific topic and could exist controversial. An editorial, written past the editor of the journal or invited, can be perspective (virtually articles published in that particular issue) or persuasive (arguing a specific point of view). Other manufactures published in a journal include letters to the editor, volume reviews, conference proceedings and abstracts, and abstracts from other journals.[x]

WHAT TO READ IN A JOURNAL? – CHOOSING THE RIGHT Article

Not all inquiry articles published are excellent, and it is pragmatic to make up one's mind if the quality of the study warrants reading of the manuscript. The first footstep for a reader is to choose a correct article for reading, depending on one's individual requirement. The next stride is to read the selected article methodically and efficiently.[2] A simple decision-making flowchart is depicted in [Figure one], which helps one to decide the blazon of commodity to select. This flowchart is meant for one who has a specific intent of choosing a particular type of commodity and not for one who intends to browse through a journal.

Schematic flowchart of the first footstep in choosing an article to read

HOW TO Starting time READING AN Commodity?

"In that location is an art of reading, as well as an art of thinking, and an art of writing."

Clarence Day

At first glance, a journal article might appear intimidating for some or confusing for others with its tables and graphs. Reading a research article can be a frustrating experience, specially for the one who has not mastered the art of reading scientific literature. Just like in that location is a method to extract a tooth or prepare a crenel, 1 can also learn to read research articles 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 report along with figures, tables and/or graphs.

6. Discussion: The estimation of the results and implications of the study.

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

Review articles do not usually follow the above design, unless they are systematic reviews or meta-analysis. The cardinal rule is: Never start reading an article from the first to the terminate. It is better to brainstorm by identifying the conclusions of the study by reading the title and the abstract.[12] If the commodity does not have an abstract, read the conclusions or the summary at the terminate of the article beginning. After reading the abstract or conclusions, if the reader deems it is interesting or useful, and then the unabridged commodity can exist read [Effigy 2].

Controlling flowchart to decide whether to read the chosen commodity or non

THE Title

Like the title of a picture show which attracts a filmgoer, the championship of the commodity is the one which attracts a reader in the outset place. A good championship will inform the potential reader a great deal about the report to determine whether to become ahead with the paper or dismiss it. Well-nigh readers prefer titles that are descriptive and cocky-explanatory without having to look at the unabridged commodity to know what information technology is all almost.[2] For case, the newspaper entitled "Microwave processing – A blessing for pathologists" gives an idea most the commodity in general to the reader. But there is no indication in the title whether it is a review commodity 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 have a better agreement of the content of the paper.

ABSTRACT

Abstruse helps us determine whether we should read the entire article or non. In fact, most journals provide abstruse complimentary of cost online assuasive us to decide whether we need to purchase the entire commodity. Near scientific journals now have a structured abstract with split 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, in that location is usually a restriction near the number of words that can be included in an abstract. This makes the abstract curtailed enough for ane to read rapidly.

The abstruse can be read in a systematic mode 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 brand a note of any questions that were raised while reading the abstract and be sure that answers have been plant later on reading the unabridged commodity.[12]

Reading the entire article

In one case the reader has decided to read the entire article, one can begin with the introduction.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the introduction is to provide the rationale for conducting the study. This section ordinarily starts with existing knowledge and previous research of the topic under 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 skilful introduction should provide proper background for the study. The aims and objectives are commonly mentioned at the end of the introduction. The reader should likewise determine whether a inquiry hypothesis (study hypothesis) was stated and later bank 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 inquiry manufactures, all details are rarely included but in that location should be enough data to understand how the study was carried out.[12] Information about the number of subjects included in the study and their categorization, sampling methods, the inclusion criteria (who tin be in) and exclusion criteria (who cannot be in) and the variables chosen can be derived by reading this section. The reader should become acquainted with the procedures and equipment used for data collection and notice out whether they were appropriate.

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

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

Results that were statistically meaning and results that were not, must exist identified. One should also detect whether a right statistical exam was employed for analysis and was the level of significance advisable for the study. To capeesh the option of a statistical test, i requires an understanding of the hypothesis beingness tested.[14,15] Table 3 provides a list of usually used statistical tests used in scientific publications. Clarification and estimation of these tests is beyond the scope of this paper. It is wise to remember the following communication: It is not simply of import to know whether a difference or clan is statistically significant only also appreciate whether it is big or substantial enough to be useful clinically.[xvi] In other words, what is statistically significant may not be clinically significant.

Table three

Bones statistics commonly used in scientific publications

DISCUSSION

This is the most important section of the article where the research questions are answered and the pregnant of analysis and estimation of the information are presented. Usually the study results are compared with other studies, explaining in what aspects they were unlike or like. Ideally, no new information should exist 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 report, providing suggestions about areas that demand additional inquiry.

The meaning of results and their analyses, new theories or hypotheses, limitations of the report, explanation of differences and similarities with other comparable studies, and suggestions for hereafter research are offered in this section. Information technology is important to call back that the discussions are the authors' interpretations and opinions and not necessarily facts.

READING THE Conclusion (AGAIN !)

Though conclusion office had been read at the beginning, it is prudent to read information technology once again at the terminate to confirm whether what we had inferred initially is correct. If the conclusion had not fabricated sense earlier, it may make sense later on 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 exist asked nether various sub-headings of an original inquiry paper are presented as a uncomplicated questionnaire in Table iv. It is assumed 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. 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 will help in agreement most aspects of a research article.

Table 4

Questionnaire for original research manufactures

Conclusion

"Allow us read with method, and advise to ourselves an finish to which our studies may point. The use of reading is to aid united states of america in thinking."

Edward Gibbon

It has become mandatory to read scientific literature to exist well-informed of always-expanding information and/or for better diagnosis, prognosis and therapy. Since in that location is an affluence 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 only efficient and logical approach to scientific literature has been presented here for choosing articles and reading them systematically and effectively for a improve understanding.

Footnotes

Source of Support: Naught.

Conflict of Involvement: None declared.

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–eight. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

ii. 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 evidence-based medicine. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005;93:499–501. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

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

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

x. Peh WC, Ng KH. Basic structure and types of scientific papers. Singapore Med J. 2008;49:522–five. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

13. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication. [Concluding accessed on 2011 Oct 10]. Bachelor 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]

xvi. Riegelman RK. Studying a Study and Testing a Test: How to read the medical evidence. 5th ed. Philadelphia, The states: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2005. p. 45. [Google Scholar]

buckleyagavered.blogspot.com

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

Share this post